THE DREAM FIGHT FOR THE AGES - PART II

THE DREAM FIGHT FOR THE AGES
(Pacman Schooled the Golden Boy)

by Doods A. Amora, PEE

The reality of the dream came in sweet…

But in the lurking shadows, a nightmare lingers not only for now, but for long in the stretch of unkind history...


SWEET DREAMS, HAUNTING NIGHTMARES

“In a Fight Between A Good Big Man and A Good Little Man, the Good Big Man Always Beat the Good Little Man.” That’s the state of things before the morning of December 7 in the Philippines. But then a david named Pacman lopsidedly but unexpectedly vanquished the legendary goliath in a masterful display of domination.

"Our dream came true," Roach said. "It was no surprise. I knew in round one we had him. He had no legs, he was hesitant, and he was shot. My guy was just too fresh for him."

With his left eye swollen shut and face bruised, the Big Man called out similar to Roberto Duran’s infamous “no mas”!

Eight rounds of punishment were enough. There’s no sense prolonging the pain.

The mismatch is over. The nightmare had to be stopped...


THE PREPARATION

Before the fight, Freddie Roach was tagged as 'irresponsible' when he led the Pacman’s camp in making this mismatch to happen. But Roach maintained that Oscar can’t pull the trigger anymore. Except for the die-hard Pacman fans, Freddie was not being believed. The odds showed it. Even in the Philippines, a lot of the money in the last minute came out for Dela Hoya.

To be honest, I was scared of this fight. When Oscar fought Pretty Boy Floyd, my scorecard was for Dela Hoya. I watched them again lately and I still believe Dela Hoya won that fight. What awed me were the stiff machine-gun jabs that kept Pretty Boy at bay, the strong big left hooks that Pretty Boy highly respected and the 45 degree angled uppercuts that had paralyzed a lot of champions. They, as I imagined, must be too much weaponry against the smaller Pacquiao. And Oscar is not the lethargic type. He is himself a relentless pumping machine.

Who is not scared of the Golden Boy?

De La Hoya had a monstrous training camp at the Big Bear Mountains in California. In preparing for this fight, a lot of new arts & sciences in body conditioning like acupuncture, plyometrics, exotic diet, etc; all these had been incorporated into a novel regimen supervised by two of boxing world’s greatest maestros: Angelo Dundee and Nacho Beristain. With two top southpaws in Victor Ortiz and Edwin Valero as sparring partners, what else can a boxing pundit ask for?

A week before the fight, De La Hoya was said to have slid phenomenally down to 145 and later at 141 pounds. On the opposite side, Pacquiao was reportedly hovering at some 153 lbs - meaning that Pacquiao in a likely twist of events could be the heavier guy comes fight time. Unbelievable...?

Odd indeed because Pacman fans were looking forward to a drained Oscar as a result of dieting, if not, of starvation en route to achieving 147 lbs. Fearsome looking on the contrary, the weigh-in pictures showed a well-trimmed, well sculptured and a physically excellent Oscar Dela Hoya.

Meanwhile, Pacman’s mentor Freddie Roach elected to make the most of the same old traditional Wild Card sweat-shop style of training. Although Plyometrics was also explored but later it was abandoned - it reportedly did not fit to Pacman’s metabolism. With less fanfare this time, the Pacman worked, worked & worked diligently to the limits.

Entering the ring at 148.5 pounds from the 142 pounds at official weigh-in, Pacquiao surprisingly, was the heavier fighter when the first bell rang. De La Hoya, who weighed 145 just 24 hours earlier, came into the ring Sunday at 147. Defying traditional logic, something was smelling fishy..? Nah, charge it to the wonders of modern science...


OSCAR CAN’T PULL THE TRIGGER ANYMORE?

Although Oscar showed some brilliance in the first round, Manny Pacquiao set the texture of the fight – influencing the action, out-speeding and out-hitting Oscar De La Hoya. In the third round, we already knew Pacquaio had Oscar beaten; the reddening of Oscar’s face was manifestation of a prelude to a massacre.

The feared big Left Hooks although executed once in a while, just hit air all night. Likewise, the rangy & rapid jabs could not smack the mark and the right straights could not be set up. All the while, the missiles called Caliber 45 didn’t show its effectiveness even with the proddings of Nacho Beristain. At this time it appeared that all the pre-fight hypes about the size & reach advantage and the conditioning marvels of De La Hoya eventually meant nothing.

What happened? Probably, the Golden Boy can't pull the trigger anymore.

In fairness to ODLH, to me Oscar can still pull the trigger but not if Manny Pacquaio is his opponent.

Constantly waving and moving his head from side to side, up & down, and side-stepping to Oscar’s left, Pacman kept eluding De La Hoya's attempts to headhunt. Frustrated and confused, Oscar increased his intensity, only to bump into thorns of counter left hands and right crosses of Pacquiao. As a result, Oscar couldn't set-up his timing as the explosions of his arsenal of guns jammed. Then, with speed and accuracy, Manny would come back from nowhere, step forward, and at the same time tag straight lefts direct up to Oscar's facade.

Midway in the fight, Manny increased his zigzagging from side to side, darting in and out; while unleashing castigating combinations. While there were occasional flurries of left hooks and right starights by Dela Hoya but Manny then would bob down and spin around, further moving to Oscar’s left – in the process bringing him safely out of range. Oscar couldn't strike back, because Manny like a ninja wasn't already there. Stealthy? Yes, Manny continued his stealthy form all night, keeping Oscar's radar perplexed.

Oscar in the later rounds increasingly became helpless. It became clear that the hurricane that once terrorized the lighter weight divisions had turned out to be a tornado in the welterweight. And as the twisters came from all angles, Oscar concentrated to block Manny’s punches, disabling himself to deliver shots of his own. Manny in turn, fired missiles of lead straight left hands, then right hooks, then a barrage of looping lefts, then right uppercuts, and lefts to the body and so on and so forth - as a new cycle of attacks would begin again and again.

THE SCHOOLING OF THE GOLDEN BOY

As everyone now knows, Pacquiao extraordinarily & systematically dismantled the legend out of Oscar De La Hoya. “The body punches killed Oscar”, quipped Roach. "I knew it because he started to slow down in the third and fourth after he felt Manny's power."

And while boxing experts predicted a ‘schooling’ by Oscar on the Pacman, what happened was the opposite.

The signatures of power and relentless combinations performed in blinding speed did it again – in the process making the Golden Boy as if inept and mediocre.

With Pacquiao’s lessons seemingly able to find its targets at will, the fight became so lopsided that one could see the imminent end of the career of boxing's richest & brightest star.

“Manny is like the Energizer bunny,” said Richard Schaefer, chief executive officer of De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions. “You can’t stop him. You can’t pull the batteries out. That’s why they call him the Pacman, because he never stops,” he added.

De La Hoya landed only 83 out of 402 thrown punches which can be translated into 10.375 blows per round, or 3.458 punches per minute. It's not that Oscar became lazy in this fight. He just couldn't unleash and hit a moving target in a ninja-like Pacman.

Pacquiao on the other hand, delivered a quality throughput of 224 of 585 punches. This translates into 28 landing blows per round, or 9.33 per minute. In other words, for every punch that hits Pacquaio, Manny did some three power shots to answer the Golden Boy.

It was painful to watch, it was again, a mismatch, a massacre so to speak!

The end of the eighth round became the end of the episode. Oscar’s decision to call it quits was probably easy. The decision to call good-bye to a career may be a lot tougher.


THE CONCLUDING PART

Pacquiao was way ahead on the scorecards of judges Stanley Christodoulou (79-72), Adalaide Byrd (80-71) and Dave Moretti (80-71) at the end of eighth round. In my book, it was a sweep, 80-72, for the Pacman.

When the massacre was stopped at the end of the eighth, Oscar immediately walked his way across the ring to congratulate Manny on his victory. Manny thanked him and said, "You're still my idol, whatever happens." Oscar answered, "No, you're now my idol!" It was one of the few counters that ODLH had successfully delivered that night.

Pacquiao’s domination over the Golden Boy had again confirmed that he is the best P4P fighter in the world. But the equally real winner in my opinion was Freddie Roach. With Roach, the hurricane in Pacman steadily improved in each and every fight - making him one, if not the fiercest destroyer in the fistic world. Pacquaio in his part must be credited for his gifts of speed and power. By speed, we mean not only hand-speed but tremendous leg-speed, included. Those powerful limbs enabled him to get in and out, and go side to side in circles in unbelievable quickness of a leopard. That's Pacman's secret unveiled!

In the end, Oscar Dela Hoya is synonymous to big time fights. But "the unknowns that took its toll are his age, his inactivity, fighting a southpaw, the degree of hunger and motivation. Those intangibles will only be known once he gets into the ring”, as one top boxing expert once said in an article.

Whatever happens, the great Oscar Dela Hoya is still an idol in the fistic world. That's a fact!

Doods Amora, PEE
December 8, 2008

THE DREAM FIGHT FOR THE AGES - PART I

THE DREAM FIGHT FOR THE AGES

Doods A. Amora, PEE
(December 1, 2008)


The World’s Most Exciting Boxer Vs. The Biggest Name in the Boxing World...!

December 7, 2008 will see another holiday in the Philippines. Unnerving, bloody and frightening - the ending of an episode I saw in my vision.


THE DREAM MISMATCH

In a few days from today, the actuality of the ‘dream match’ will soon unveil. Whether this reverie can live up to the golden platter of expectations as the media hype suggests, it could be the other way around. It could turn out to be fits of nightmare of a mismatch that will linger into the inner fancies of pundits in the so-called sweet science.

Oscar and Manny are living legends – they are top recipes to a dream date. But from the very beginning, the Pacquiao–Dela Hoya match has been seen as a bizarre concept, a morbid joke in fact.

Mismatch? Probably yes, maybe not... But then, that’s what makes the bout very interesting.


Albeit they are giga-champions, they don’t suppose to belong in the same circuit. Pacman is too small while Dela Hoya is obviously huge. Note that when Pacquiao had his 1995 light-flyweight debut as nobody in the boxing world, De La Hoya had already been preparing for his third defense of a lightweight title. In other words, while the Pacman was about to start tasting the impact of real fists camouflaged in leather, Dela Hoya had already been world champion in two weight divisions. They were then 30 pounds apart; they were 30 pounds apart a few weeks ago when the match-up was announced!

Yet at a catch weight of 147 lbs, (the limit in the welterweight), the dream is about to become real. Manny has to climb up while Oscar to slide down from their respective weights. But Oscar has always been much bigger than Manny, and "it's tricky to estimate or underestimate the end-effects on their respective physique even if both have to weigh no more than 147 pounds at the weigh-in time", as one sports columnist said.

Will the pint-sized Pacquiao shock the intimidating frame and height of De La Hoya? On the other hand, can De La Hoya bulldoze & flatten his tiny opponent easily? The possibility that Pacquiao could be badly hurt has become a streaming denigration as the match was being pursued. Obvious as it is; the reach and height advantage, superior technical skills and overall ring savvy, made the odds favour immensely for a Dela Hoya victory!


IMMORTALITY


Immortalized in 44 fights (39-5 with 30 by KO’s), De La Hoya has defeated seventeen world champions (and former champions) and has won ten world titles in six different weight classes. From Junior Lightweight (130 lbs) to Middleweight (160 lbs) range, Oscar had fought the best, the most fearsome and the biggest names in boxing in these weight divisions.

Pacquiao, (47-3-2, 35 KO’s) on the other hand, is a rampaging hurricane terrorizing the light-flyweight to lightweight divisions. Currently acknowledged as the best pound-for-pound fighter on the planet, the Filipino fireball has likewise achieved his own immortality over lighter and smaller boxers. The southpaw piston has a number of truly astounding victories on his record, but then his last fight at 135 pounds was just where Oscar started.

Sk
epticism and intrigue have it that the match could be a making of a grand script - in a theatrical circus that is counter-productive to the sport. Highly marketable even in these financially beleaguered times, skeptics say the mismatch could only be for the money – and lots of it... mind boggling as it is.

Generating the richest payday & pay-per-view revenues, Oscar, the Golden Boy, has been dubbed as the most popular boxer in recent history. De La Hoya, the only fighter capable today of drawing at least half-a-million pay-per-view buys regardless of who the opponent is. But Pacquiao is the most exciting fighter in the world - he too has his own PPV following. A De La Hoya victory means more profitable work schedules at least for one year more. A Pacquiao victory means the end of Oscar’s mega-buck heydays and eventually his retirement as a prize-fighter.


But Filipinos love to play underdog. Trusted by his countrymen to crush Oscar, the guy Pacquaio outmatched in size, weight, height and reach; it would be pleasant to see how the diminutive countryman beat one of the best in the heavier divisions. Note that ODLH happens to be the biggest name in the sport. Beating Oscar will put the Pacman on top of the world!

Pacquaio had already surpassed Elorde’s achievements when he successfully grabbed the WBC Lightweight World Championship past David Diaz via a stunning knock-out. Now, it would be more than superstardom. It would be for the higher grandeur in the chronicles to come by future generations.

In the meantime, Pacquiao must have been honored to have with him Dela Hoya in the ring. In Pacquiao, the challenge to overcome a bigger challenge must have been the other motivation. On the other hand, Oscar, wanting an explosive performance prior to his eventual exit, chose the best of today’s fighters in a smaller & beatable Manny Pacquiao. To Oscar, Pacquiao fits the qualification perfectly.


CAN OUR PACMAN DO IT..?

First is the weight issue. The media-reported weights of both Pacquiao and De La Hoya as monitored during their respective training periods have been significantly erratic. De La Hoya in one publicity stunt was said to have slid phenomenally down to 145 after a week of training and later at 141 pounds. On the opposite side, Pacquiao was reportedly hanging at some 153 lbs - meaning that there is a possibility that Pacquiao in a likely twist of events could be the heavier guy comes fight time.


It can be recalled that at the time the official news broke out on the match-up, the Pacman camp was looking forward to a drained Oscar as result of dieting, if not, of starvation en-route to achieve 147 lbs. Apparently not is the case gentlemen, if media reports have to be believed. On the other hand, Pacman’s moving up to the limits of the welterweight would result to lesser power and speed, as the Golden Boy’s camp and every boxing pundit anticipated.

As many observers quip, 'whether or not the reported weights of the protagonists are factual, it would be interesting to see if Pacquiao has maintained his power and speed at the new weight. On the flipside, the traditional thinking about De La Hoya being drained and weakened, all indicate to be false'. Latest newspaper accounts saw Dela Hoya fit, well sculptured and looked excellent. Even Pacman’s physical conditioning coach Alex Ariza was reportedly awed upon seeing Oscar anew!

In the end, the weight concerns must then be an equalized paramater. With the weight issue cancelling each other out, the bout could be more competitive than one could have originally imagined.

Second is the height & reach issue. Yes, Oscar has tremendous advantages in these departments and Pacman cannot do anything to increase his height and reach. This makes the match-up more attractive because to make up for this predicament, Pacman has to exploit on his blinding speed. Speed & power had been the signature of the Pacman and Freddie Roach must have done his homework to offset Oscar’s advantage. But how Pacman’s speed and power overcome Oscar’s head-start advantage is one that the fans have to watch out.

And lots of body conditioning will play roles in this game. Oscar's size, height and reach advantage would be fearsome in the first half of the fight. Should Pacman survive these rounds, the factor of conditioning comes in. I would not be surprised if Pacquiao dominates the later rounds as Oscar losing steam can no longer pull the trigger.

Oscar pulling the trigger? To me, yes! It will be the scene in the first six rounds... That why this bout is scary. The Golden Boy has the capability to pulverize Pacman during the early cantos of the fight. If Pacman’s cleverness and footwork work, then he has the chance to survive and win the fight.

Third is technique & intelligence. It is being said that De La Hoya’s most lethal weapon is the crossbreed left hook/uppercut. Sport buffs used to call it as “Caliber 45” owing to the angle and timing at which the missile is delivered direct to the opponent’s chin. The effectiveness of this weapon had knocked down the best of current & former world champions in the course of Oscar’s career. But it is believed that Pacquiao’s southpaw stance could neutralize much of its effect. Again, we would like to imagine that Freddie Roach must have developed antidotes for this lethal weapon. And Pacquiao must be intelligent enough to implement it inside the ring.


And there’s that rangy & rapid ‘one, two, three jabs’ that will go stinging all night. With Oscar’s height and reach advantage, Pacman must be in full diet of this dish most of the evening. It is expected that Oscar must be utilizing this weapon first & foremost to neutralize the patented aggression of Pacquaio. By the later rounds Oscar’s camp must have been anticipating an opponent’s face reduced to bloody pulp. But then, Pacman & Freddie must have rehearsed counter-measures.

Fourth is execution. Training is training. What counts is the actual performance. Simulations and Mechanical Training could shape actual performance to textbook precision but actual performance also depends on how the opponent executes his own game. It can be recalled that the Manila Ice didn’t come out in Pacquiao-Morales I. The Marco Bolo neither showed up in Pacquiao-Barrera II. But I would like to believe that the same Marco Bolo technique had battered David Diaz to submission.

In a highly competitive duel, effective adjustments and presence of mind win battles. Both camps had done their home works and are prepared. Both camps know the weaknesses and strengths of each other and how to exploit them. Both camps have game plans.

What if the game plan doesn’t work? When Juan Manuel Marquez was knocked down three times in Round 1 in their first encounter with Pacquiao, it was effective adjustment and presence of mind in the execution of the adjustments that nearly cost Pacman the bout, lest it was a draw as everybody knows. This is where the fighter alone inside the ring must deliver to himself the ring savvy that ordinary mortals don’t have.

Fifth & last, is the maestro. In this case, Freddie Roach vs. the tandem of Nacho Beristain & Angelo Dundee. All of them are the best in the trade. If the bout goes very competitive lasting to the last round, the better coach will win the game. Again, the fight becomes more exciting to imagine. Freddie Roach however has some advantage because he knows Oscar well. But the geniuses of Nacho and Dundee cannot be underestimated. Let’s see how they do it.


CONCLUDING PART

With full media hype, the perceived big mismatch now appears to be a pretty good stuff. With more science in body conditioning, stocks of trainers’ wisdom and lengthy training regimens, both fighters had narrowed down the loopholes.

After all, the joke is not a laughing matter anymore but truly it becomes the biggest fight of the year.

My only prediction is that the fight will be bloody and frightening. Both masked in crimson fluid to the end, I saw see-sawing knockdowns in both fighters, but not knock outs. Then, a close decision in the end – would it be PACMAN or GOLDEN BOY...?

The thought of it makes my senses frozen.


DOODS/

December 1, 2008

POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY IN INDUSTRIES - PART III

RELIABILITY OF INDUSTRIAL PLANT POWER SYSTEM – PART III
by Doods A. Amora, PEE

VOLTAGE DIPS & SAGS

VOLTAGE DIPS & SAGS IN INDUSTRIAL PLANTS


Voltage Dips & Sags and their impact on plant operation constitute the most frequent and most noticeable reliability problem in the distribution systems of industrial plants. Spoiling Reliability, voltage dips can result in trip-outs of plant equipment - shutting down manufacturing lines leading to production loss and expensive re-start procedures.

These system disturbances can be grouped into three general types:

Voltage Sag is a partial reduction in the magnitude of voltage that often persists for extended periods and is usually related to system loading conditions.

Voltage Dip is a significant reduction in voltage for a relatively short duration, often caused by power system faults, or as frequently in events of large motor starts-up.

Voltage Interruption is a complete loss of input voltage, lasting from seconds to a much longer time.

Inside the industrial plant, voltage dips may be caused by faults somewhere in the other parts of the distribution system and more frequently by large motor starts-up in already loaded transformers. Common in heavy industrial plants, voltage sags are caused by heavily loaded transformers with poor voltage regulation and relatively lengthy distribution lines.


Utility system Voltage Dips are often caused by bad weather conditions (thunderstorm, etc), or utility equipment failures, or faults in some other areas of the utility system; and can last anywhere from a few cycles to seconds or more. Voltage Sags in utility systems on the other hand, are related to voltage drops along transmission lines and more prevalently by system loading conditions, as well.

Voltage Interruption is the complete loss of voltage and usually require a source of energy to replace the utility supply.

There are several mechanisms by which voltage sag or dip can interfere with industrial manufacturing processes, as follows:


Control Error – Loss of control power results in the inability to control the process.

Contactor Dropout – Many industrial controls employ magnetically-latched contactors as motor control devices. A voltage dip or sag can cause a momentary collapse of the magnetic field which holds the contacts closed. When the contacts open, the motor stops.

Voltage Flicker – In the practical sense, flicker is the repetitive variation in intensity of lighting, and is more of a human irritation factor (threshold of perception, or threshold of human objection) than a direct cause of process disruption. However, it can also be used in a more literal sense to describe a set of problems in which lighting is extinguished due to voltage dips.

Machine Dynamics – Since voltage magnitude is essential to transmitting power, voltage dips and sags limit the ability of a power system to distribute power from sources to loads. This limitation in power transfer can lead to generators not being able to maintain stability.

Stall & Re-Acceleration – Motors will stall if the supply voltage is depressed for a prolonged period. Furthermore, motors must reaccelerate when normal voltage is restored. Reacceleration involves higher than normal motor currents which may result in further voltage sag problems.


MITIGATING VOLTAGE SAGS

As system modifications can be implemented to minimize the magnitude and duration of voltage dips & sags; these modifications too, don’t come in cheap. However, if the vulnerability of the system is understood, the system engineer may well identify the only selected critical areas that require modification. Or if several problems can be solved with “one stone hitting several birds”, then these capital outlays would come up in reasonable proportions.


So then, voltage dips & sags generally imply solutions that provide some means of supporting voltage. One good voltage support scheme is the ‘On-Load-Tap-Changer’ (OLTC) usually in large substation power transformers. Other schemes could be the Automatic Voltage Regulators (AVR’s) which are separate apparatuses from the transformer but somehow perform similar function as the OLTC’s. While the OLTC’s are accomplished in the primary winding side of the transformer, the AVR’s are preferred voltage correction at the secondary output side. Smaller voltage support apparatuses could be the Voltage Stabilizers which are for control systems. Again, these don’t come in cheap.

Because of the diversity in sub-distribution system peaks, OLTC’s are very effective in primary substations which are usually upstream of several layers of smaller downstream substations. But at the intermediate voltages of 3.6 kV, 4.16 kV or 6.9 kV where large motors are populating, the performances of OLTC’s and AVR’s may be found wanting because of their inherent time delay responses. Note that the time delay is designed purposively in these equipments. OLTC’s and AVR’s don’t just react instantaneously, as the logic of these apparatuses would first make sure that the voltage variation is real and not just fleeting spikes. This is to prevent hunting or wild operation. They too, have contacts immersed in oil. The contacts wear rapidly and the oil need frequent replacements. And operation must be interrupted more frequently.


VULNERABILITY TO VOLTAGE DIPS

There are many things that could happen during voltage dips. Generally, for a running motor for instance; as the supply voltage to the motor decreases considerably during voltage dips, the motor speed decreases. Depending on the depth and duration of the voltage dip, motor speed may recover to its normal value as the voltage amplitude recovers. If the voltage dip magnitude and/or duration exceed certain limits, the motor may stall and would be taken out of the system by the means provided for in its controls. Maximum voltage dip magnitude and/or duration, which the motor operation can survive, depend on the motor parameters and the torque-speed characteristic of the driven load.

On the other hand, when a large motor is started-up in an already sagged voltage of an already loaded transformer source, the ensuing resultant voltage dip during motor starting may cause the motor to stall and could not complete the starting process. As discussed above, this scenario would also affect the running motors, as they too may stall - aggravating the problem in a domino effect. In this scenario, currents fly high and something somewhere has to trip to relieve the system from further disturbance.


SYSTEM BEHAVIOR DURING LARGE MOTOR START-UP


Transformer reactions to large motor-starting are manifested in voltage dips. In general terms, transformers in an electrical system are usually larger than the maximum demands they serve, in some instances even larger than the connected loads. In the industrial plant scenario, the obvious reason at first glance for this apparent oversizing is the anticipation for future load growth. Fine…

But more often than not, sizing the transformer with extra kVA capacity unwittingly addresses voltage dip problems, not for load growth for which it is intended originally. That’s why for newly constructed plants where load growth is not yet there, the problem of starting significantly large motors may not surface out. Why? Because the extra kVA capacity intended for load growth is taking care of it.

Now, when the plant is already 25 years old and a series of expansions & load growths had been in place, the transformers may now be loaded near their full load ratings. Fine…the transformer can still handle it. However, effects of voltage regulation (which is normal to transformers) this time would surface out. The voltage difference between loaded and unloaded output of a transformer is voltage regulation. Voltage Regulation in transformers is normal – meaning, as the load increases there is a decrease in voltage output due to the corresponding voltage drop within the primary and secondary windings.

Now if a 3.6 kV transformer (transformer terminal voltage of 3.6 kV by North American Norms) has a voltage regulation of 8% (which is usual); the voltage at the secondary terminals in a fully loaded transformer would then be 3.3 kV. If the same transformer is 80% loaded, the voltage at the secondary terminals of the transformer may have been in the vicinity of 3.37 kV. What happens then when a 2,300 kW or a 6,400 kW motor is started up? There would surely be voltage dip! By how much..? And how much voltage dip can cause problems?


BEHAVIOR OF LARGE MOTOR START-UP

Partly similar to short circuit condition, motors have a high initial inrush current when energized at a low power factor (0.30 lagging for 100 hp & about 0.16 for 1,000 hp motor) from standstill. This sudden increase in the current flowing to the load causes a momentary increase in the voltage dip at the supply transformer terminals, the drop along the distribution system, and a corresponding reduction in the voltage at the utilization equipment.

The magnitude of transient current involved in motor starting is however lower than the short circuit condition. But in effect, switching “on” to energize a large motor can be likened to a “soft short circuit”. Like short circuits, the effect of starting large motors results to huge voltage dips but lower in magnitude than the full short circuit scenario.

The voltage drop at the transformer secondary terminals is proportional to motor starting kVA over the short-circuit capacity of the transformer. When motor starting kVA is drawn from a system, the voltage drop in percent of the initial voltage is approximately equal to the Motor Starting kVA divided by the Sum of this kVA and the Short Circuit kVA (Motor Application & Maintenance Handbook by Robert W. Smeaton, 1969 Edition).


SUBSTATION TRANSFORMERS Vs. LOADS

Because of the effects of Transformer Voltage Regulation and Voltage Dips in starting large motors, North American motors after mid 1960’s are rated at 230, 460, 2,300, 4,000, 6,600 or 13,200 volts for use with distribution systems that are rated at 240, 480, 2400, 4,160, 6,900 or 13,800 volts respectively. Again, note the difference in motor nameplate voltages viz-a-viz the transformer terminal voltages. The apparent higher distribution nominal voltages than motor voltages are deliberately established by transformer and motor manufacturers to deal with the inherent voltage drops in the system such as: internal voltage drop of the transformer as dictated by its voltage regulation capability, voltage drop along the distribution cables and the impedance of the system. This could mean that a transformer could be 4,160v at no-load condition may only be 4,000v or less at the motor terminals when the system is already heavily loaded. While in this condition, when a large motor is started-up somewhere in the system, the more critical will the voltage be as felt by other loads in the system.

The “nominal system voltage” is the terminal voltage of the transformer. Per General Electric (Prolec) Publication, “secondary voltage ratings are approximately 4.2 percent above the standard motor voltages, allowing for voltage drop in the line between the substation and the motor terminals without operating the motor at subnormal voltage. Motors and control operate satisfactorily on voltages 10 percent above or below rating.”

In some IEEE proceedings, a question has been raised why the utilization equipment voltage ratings and system nominal voltage cannot be made the same. Manufacturers’ response is that the performance guarantee for utilization equipment is based on the nameplate rating and not on the system nominal voltage.

SIDEBAR: THE LOWEST ACROSS-THE-LINE STARTING VOLTAGE THAT MOTOR MANUFACTURERS GUARANTEE IS 90% OF THE MOTOR NAMEPLATE VOLTAGE,- NOT ON THE NOMINAL VOLTAGE .RATING.

That’s why most motors are designed to be capable of operating at plus or minus 10% of nameplate voltage. Therefore, the voltage drop on inrush should not be allowed to drop more than 10% of the rated voltage. This means 208v for 230v or 414v for 460 volt motors. Likewise, 2.07 kV for 2.3 kV motors, or 3.6 kV for 4.0 kV motors. It means that a 4.0 kV motor can still operate satisfactorily at 3,600v but any disturbance in the system that brings the system voltage lower, the affected motors may trip off as provided for by its protection – or if not, the motor burns.

Hence, the wisdom of employing “reduced voltage stating methods” are common to large motors in order to reduce the voltage dips during starts-up. Foremost of these mitigating starting methods are: reduced voltage auto-transformer type, soft starters, and variable frequency controllers for squirrel cage induction motors and resistor starting (liquid or hard resistor) types for wound rotor induction motors.


ECONOMIC EVALUATION

While the stability of the incoming supply voltage is fundamentally a technical problem, at the end of the day, it is business sense that makes decisions in implementing a fix. Some solutions to voltage dip and sag problems require the use of exotic technology. Today, terms like: “voltage dip-proofing” or “voltage dip & sag immunization” are already a reality, but then again, they don’t come in cheap – and may be prohibitive!

A major influencing factor concerning the financial loss is whether or not the factory production is continuous. As practiced by many industries, continuous production means that there is market to all products that a company can produce. In continuous production, the production lost during downtime cannot be recovered by working extra time, so loss of production translates directly into loss of profit – that is, the loss is equal to the value of the product not produced as a result of the downtime.

In a non-continuous process, lost production can be recovered by overtime working, although there may well be additional labor & utilities consumption costs.

Whether or not a solution is seen as cost-effective thus depends on the economic criterion that is used to evaluate the solution. The actual economic justification in preventing production interruptions due to voltage disturbances must therefore consider the following elements:


1) How vulnerable is the process to various types of voltage disturbances?

2) What is the net cost of production outages due to these disturbances?

3) How effective is a particular solution in avoiding these outages?

4) How does the cost of the solution compare to the savings which can be realized?


As to the cost associated with voltage interruptions the following elements should be recognized and quantified:

Cost of Lost Production – In the simplest case, this is the incremental margin on products that cannot be sold because they are not manufactured.

Cost of Damaged Product – If the interruption damages a partially completed product, the cost of repairing that product must be recognized. In some cases, the product cannot be repaired, so the value of the raw materials (including the consumed energy and other manufacturing costs up to the point where the disruption occurred) must be accounted for together with the cost of the incremental value added to the product.

In other environments, a major source of concern is lost computer data.

Cost of Maintenance – This is the cost of reacting to a voltage disruption. This includes everything involved in restoring production, including trouble-shooting and correcting the problem, cleanup and repair, disposing of damaged product, and environmental costs.

In some industries (e.g., plastics, glass manufacturing, cement manufacturing, electronics, etc), an interruption may result in the need to invest many days and a significant amount of money in cleaning up the process system before it can be returned to service.

Hidden Costs – This factor may be the most difficult to quantify but it can easily be the most significant. If the impact of the voltage dip or sag is control error, it is possible that the impact on product may not be apparent until the product is in the hands of the consumer. As business nightmare, product recall and the subsequent public relations costs can be significant or may even cause bankruptcies.

It is usually best to identify the problems that are responsible for Plant Reliability, and apply solutions that most efficiently address those gaps.

If the manufacturing plant does not design its system with reliabilty and quality in mind, SOMEONE ELSE WILL.

DAA
Sept, 2008

POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY IN INDUSTRIES - PART II

RELIABILITY OF INDUSTRIAL PLANT POWER SYSTEM -
PART II

by Doods A. Amora, PEE

THE PILLARS OF RELIABILITY

Are “RELIABILITY NINES” achievable…?

Reliability could partially mean the best equipment or systems that are the easiest to repair or maintain. That’s maintainability.

But on top of these, redundancy is still needed. Highly reliable systems often include multiple power supplies, UPS’s (stationary or rotary), backup diesel generators (for longer power outages) and extras of whatever else is likely to fail. Troublesome equipment & apparatuses that break down a lot and take a long time to get back online are going to spoil reliability. So, the chosen system depends on the duration of outage the plant can tolerate. Diesel generator sets require about 5–10 seconds to start, come up to rated speed, develop rated voltage, and begin to powering up loads. Where even momentary outages are unacceptable, UPS or flywheels (rotary UPS’s) are now common.

Note that the concept of ‘Reliability Nines’ can be achieved through:


1) Good Design of the System
2) Effective Maintenance Program
3) Error-Free Operation

While it is true that reliability is fundamentally influenced by the sturdiness of equipment & apparatuses in the system, trouble-free operation and effective maintenance starts at the drawing board when the design of a system is conceptualized. The design of an electrical system is to provide continuous operation under all foreseeable circumstances, including utility outages and equipment breakdown. When considering the implications of reliability, all three pillars of system reliability: design, operations, and maintenance, must be inputted in the design concept.

Experts in Reliability say, “There is no maintenance program that can improve the reliability of a poorly designed system. Additionally, whatever maintenance program developed by a plant is determined by the design of the system and the goals of the organization. One goal for reasonable levels of reliability given the nature of the technology is a good selection of equipment or system that provides a Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) that is as long as possible. It is desirable to have a few relatively long but planned service interruptions rather than lots and lots of short ones that are unexpected. Maintenance also aims to provide a Mean Time To Resolution (MTTR) that is as short as possible, so that when a failure does occur service can get back quickly”. Again, this is maintainability.


Reliability practitioners further say, “The telephone system is a good example of reliability improvement over time. When telephones first became widely available in the early twentieth century, their reliability was poor by today's standards, with outages, dropped calls, line noise and crosstalk quite common. As time passed, technology improved to the point where five nines of reliability are now common. It did, however, take nearly eighty years to reach that standard of reliability”.

For sure, reliability comes at a cost - and it doesn’t come in cheap. For electric systems of any manufacturing plant for that matter; operational continuity frequently is synonymous to 'how fast the restoration of electric service' is. But swift restoration of service can not be achieved when there are no alternate paths of power flow provided in the system.


REDUNDANCY IN THE ‘N + n’ SYSTEMS

Hereunder is to introduce the terms, [N + 1], [N + 2], [N + 3]… as reliability through good system design:

1) A system with one redundant path is termed an N+1 design.

2) N + 1 would allow for one of the paths to be de-energized for maintenance while the other is still energized, allowing maintenance without system shutdown.

3) If the system is designed with a normal path and two alternate paths (N+2 design), one path could be down for maintenance, a failure could occur in a second path, and ideally, the third path would supply power to the load without interruption.

Thus new reliability jargon has given rise to the novel terms as: N+1, N+2, N+3 or N+n which speak for the degree of redundancy. How then does the Power System of an industrial plant fare with the ‘N + n’ principle?

Note that in a system that has been operating for 20 years, the more honest-to-goodness maintenance is needed to sustain continuous operation. But decent maintenance (other than wiping, air-blowing or cleaning the externals of the equipment & apparatuses) can not be done if there is no degree of redundancy in the system. Chances are, maintenance time would only be a few hours usually allocated during scheduled plant-wide annual shutdown. In this case, maintenance becomes superficial and hasty as production group would be scratching their backs when schedule to re-start operation has come.

So then, maintenance can’t be effective if the plant itself is not designed to be ‘maintainable’. The power system configuration must be maintenance-friendly such that maintaining major equipment does not mean shutting down the plant. If maintenance requires shutting down the plant, so then the plant is "not maintainable”. If continuous round-the-clock operation of all or some identifiable parts of the process is required, then system configuration must have redundant feeders or separate supplies to these components to support maintenance at other portions of the system. The power system must also be flexible in events of failures of major equipment such that the plant can still operate partially in a considerable production capacity.

But then, redundant power supplies in some instances do not always improve reliability. If two redundant feeders supply power to an industrial facility but originate at the same utility substation and are carried on the same set of power poles, reliability will be lower than if they originate at separate substations and travel to the site on different sets of power poles. The problem with redundant feeders carried on the same set of poles is that a single-point failure (e.g., a weather-related event, pole fire, or traffic accident) could cause simultaneous outages on both sources.

RATIONALE OF THE RELIABILITY STUDY

The importance of a Reliability Audit can not be over-emphasized. Its value speaks for itself the moment power is out during peak production days or during the visit of the company president. An industrial plant therefore continues to face the challenge of improving its power system availability of existing facilities in a very competitive global market. These challenges are aggravated by the condition that many plant facilities may have been in operation for more than 20 years with constant exposure to corrosive materials, fumes and a hostile environment which contribute to the gradual deterioration of equipment integrity. As the plant grows older, poor system availability may mean loss of competitiveness.

Experience has shown that capital investments to extend the life of facilities can be expensive if these are done when reacting to unplanned outages. Industry’s best practices are aimed to maximize reliability, and minimize unplanned production losses by using structured systems that implement pro-active reliability programs.

Note that if the industrial plant is already 20 years old, a sort of a Reliability Assessment should be sought for. Of course, reliability assessment should have been wanting during the drawing board conceptualization but an assessment today would not place the effort for naught. After 20 years, this kind of assessment is even more meaningful as a lurking system fault increases with age. This study therefore is used to identify improvement opportunities and manage to sustain system reliability in a cost effective manner.

The Reliability Assessment for an industrial plant may have the following objectives:


1) To identify “system vulnerabilities” or “gaps” that includes the following:

a) Loading Behavior or Load Profile of the Primary & Intermediate Substations that could have resulted to over-stresses and poor voltage regulations,

b) Review on the Flexibility of the System with regards to power supply and feeders, its capacity or capability in supporting the loads in alternate paths,

2) To identify major deviations from normal industry practices, including but not limited to:

a) Voltage-Dip levels on each major feeder or intermediate substations during starting of large motors and under other operating conditions,

b) Review on the Power Factor condition of each substation or feeder,


3) To identify whether the power system is resistant to faults & failures to include but not limited to the ability of a device or system to perform a required function under fault conditions and the ability of the system to "fail well". This includes the following:

a) Review & Confirmation of Actual Fault Duties against Interrupting or Momentary Ratings of the Existing Sets-Up,

b) Engineering Calculations Leading to Coordination and/or Discrimination of Protective Devices within the entire system,

c) Actual Re-setting, Testing & Simulations on these Protective relays whether they are performing as expected,

d) Evaluate actual condition of the equipment & apparatuses within the system if they could still last longer than expected.

4) Recommend measures to close identified gaps & vulnerabilities, including application of technology and/or system modifications that will facilitate improvement in reliability, as follows:

a) Capacity Review on all electrical equipment whether additional capacities are necessary to maintain reliable service under various operating conditions.



To be continued...

DOODS (September, 2008)

POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY IN INDUSTRIES

RELIABILITY OF INDUSTRIAL PLANT POWER SYSTEM -
PART I

by Doods A. Amora, PEE

WHAT IS RELIABILITY?

This article is an assimilation of the interwoven factors & issues that contribute to the reliability of power systems in industrial plants. As Reliability is a broad scope, understanding what it is, comes first.


IEEE defines RELIABILITY as "the ability of a system or component to perform its required functions under stated conditions for a specified period of time." Likewise, from the Wikipedia, Reliability may be defined in several ways, as follows:

* The idea that something is fit for a purpose with respect to time;

* The capacity of a device or system to perform as designed;

* The resistance to faults or failures of a device or system;

* The ability of a device or system to perform a required function under stated conditions for a specified period of time;

* The probability that a functional unit will perform its required function for a specified interval under stated conditions.

* The ability of something to "fail well" (to fail without catastrophic consequences and is restorable in a reasonable period of time).


RELIABILITY IN EVERYDAY LIFE

In the Philippines, electricity is usually taken for granted. As many observers say, ‘electrical power is somewhat like the air people breathe’. Electricity seems to be just ‘in there,’ meeting every man’s need constantly, somewhat eternally. As it is always expected that light would come on every time a switch is flipped, fact is, humanity doesn’t really think about it until it is lost. It is only during a power failure, when one enters into a dark room and instinctively hits the useless switch, realizing how important power is in daily life. But, a reliable & continuous presence of electricity is more than just comfort or convenience. It's a necessity. Take power out and industries will grind to a halt - the nation’s economy, as well. Without it today, life gets clumsy and gawky.

In an industrial plant scenario for instance: It’s only a matter of pushing a button and a 6,000 kW motor kicks up to life - just like that! And nobody seems to be thinking about it. That in a sense is reliability..! But if somebody is worrying about what could result if a button is activated (e.g., huge voltage dips or source trip-outs), then that’s another story…

Now, if nobody seems to be worrying about it - then that is good reliability..! Thus, in practical terms, power system reliability is simply: “There is power at sufficient capacity when needed, at any given time, all the time..!”

For an industrial plant, maintaining a high level of reliability requires continuing purposive watch. Of course, a plant relies on a dependable interconnected network of generation (by NPC or PNOC or IPP’s), transmission (TRANSCO & other Power Distributors), and the industry’s own Distribution Systems to power up various processes of an industrial plant whose appetite for power may be small or big time. The questions thus, are:

1) What is the industrial plant’s desired condition in so far as operational continuity is concerned?

2) How long can the industrial plant endure a forced shutdown?

The type of process and the behavior of manufacturing operations of the plant dictate the continuity of service requirements of the power system. Some plants can tolerate interruptions while others require the highest degree of continuity. Where adequacy & continuity of service is of prime importance, these plants deserve a much higher degree of sophistication in their own distribution systems than others.


THE RELIABILITY ‘NINES’

So the question is – “What levels of reliability can a manufacturing plant live with?” First of all, we need to be oriented with the ‘Reliability Nines’ as a technical lingo.

The telephone network has always been identified as a good example of a highly reliable system. But then, bad weather conditions among other factors threaten to derail its high reliability for obvious reasons. As experts say, “if the telephone system was out of service for a total of nine (9) hours over an entire year, then it was available for 525,060 minutes out of a possible 525,600 minutes. Its reliability is therefore: 525,060 divided by 525,600 minutes = .999”. Global experts label it as “three-nines” – and is a good reliability by most standards.

Note that the ‘Reliability Nines’ are new measurements for service dependability, consistency and trust-worthiness packaged in official terms as reliability. Depending on the nature of the business, the desired ‘nines’ in reliability depends on how essential the service is and what are the downtime benchmarks with other industries of similar nature. For telephone systems for instance, a nine-hour downtime per year may be excellent, but not acceptable for life-support systems in hospitals.

To compare with other types of services, the following new global standards may give some insights & discoveries as follows:

1) Homes: Three 9’s (99.9%), 9 hours downtime per year

2) Factories/Manufacturing Plants: Four 9’s (99.99%), 59 min/year

3) Hospitals, Airports: Five 9’s (99.999%), 5 minutes per year

4) Banks: Six 9’s (99.9999), 32 seconds per year

5) E-Commerce/ On-Line Markets: Nine 9’s, 30 milliseconds per year

As can be seen, reliability performance has got to do with the quality of services. In its everyday sense, quality of service means "consistency" and "repeatability". Reliability is when the service, whatever it is, is available or unavailable depending on one's perspective. A perfectly reliable system therefore is said to have a reliability of 1.0000, or a hundred percent reliable.

RELIABILITY IN THE MANUFACTURING PLANT

Note that with today’s technology, the ‘three-nines’ for telephone systems is no longer what the industry is looking at. The standard now often mentioned for traditional telephone service is the stiffer “five-nines”. This had become a motivational goal for new competing players, and a bragging right for those who have achieved it.

What about the factory? A factory or manufacturing plant supposedly belongs to ‘four-nines’. The expressed term ‘four-nines’ refer to the figure 99.99%. It's not just how frequent pieces of equipment in a power system burst into flames that solely counts. It's how much of the time the manufacturing plant is available for production. Availability already imbeds how often it breaks down and how fast it gets back into service. In addition, how long a system is out of service due to routine maintenance.


If a reliability of ‘two nines’ is acceptable to a manufacturing plant, this means that it could afford an average 87.6 hours of downtime annually (3 days, 15 hours and 40 minutes). To increase this reliability to four-nines, it means redundant systems where maintenance can be performed without necessarily shutting down production, while not loading the transformers, switchgears or cables heavily to their thresholds, and to make the system resistant to faults & failures and if it should fail, it should “fail well”.

“Failing Well” is what experts refer to in systems that sturdy enough to resist faults. And faults here mean that there shall be no disturbance to other systems that are unfaulted. The system therefore should be designed to isolate faults selectively with least disturbance to other parts of the system and should have the features for maximum reliability consistent with plant requirements. “Failing Well” also means that no damage in catastrophic proportions must result out of these faults. In Europe it is referred to as “fault control”.


To be continued…

DOODS (September, 2008)

WORLD'S LARGEST CAST RESIN TRANSFORMER

Siemens Builds the World’s Largest Cast-Resin Transformer

(from the web news archive…)


Initial use as experimental and test setup for new HVDC transmission system…

With its Geafol cast-resin transformers, Siemens Power Transmission and Distribution (PTD) is increasingly developing into a specialist for high power ratings in the medium voltage range. By the end of September 2007, the world’s largest cast-resin transformer with a rated power capacity of 40 MVA left the factory in Kirchheim/Teck, Germany. The developers and designers were able to successfully design a cast-resin transformer to this power specification. Two of the new 40-MVA transformers will be used on the experimental and test line for high voltage direct current transmission systems at Siemens PTD in Erlangen.

Comprehensive and elaborate routine testing as well as type and special tests performed on the largest cast-resin transformer to date have shown that in many cases, this transformer variant can provide an alternative to liquid-filled transformers in this power category. The design required a number of special developments. For example, whereas the higher voltage windings of cast-resin transformers of lower power rating are made of one cast, the high voltage winding of the 50-metric ton transformer, which has a rated power capacity of 40 MVA, each consists of six coil sections which are connected together to form one winding. This winding has special cooling ducts designed to dissipate heat.

Compared with oil-insulated transformers of the same power capacity, the advantages are that Geafol cast-resin insulated transformers are practically maintenance-free as well as being flame retardant and self-extinguishing, they can be recycled at relatively low cost, and can be designed for very low temperatures. And because they require little fire and water protection, they can be installed almost anywhere. In many cases, they require less area for installation than comparable liquid-filled transformers. Versions with reduced no-load and short-circuit losses also increase efficiency and thus lead to lower operating costs. The insulation consists of an environmentally friendly mixture of epoxy resin and quartz powder which does not produce toxic gases even when exposed to an electric arc. The use of cast-resin insulated transformers in many cases avoids the restrictions that apply to oil-filled transformers, while retaining properties such as operational safety and long service life.


The transformer measuring 4.8 meters long, 2.8 meters wide and – in its transportable state – 4.7 meters high was transported from the Kirchheim factory to Plochingen in Germany by special road transport on September 26, 2007, and from there by ship on to Erlangen. The two 40 MVA cast-resin transformers (20/12.2 kV) will be used on a system test setup for the new Siemens HVDC transmission system HVDC Plus. The test setup consists of a back-to-back arrangement of the power converters with the two converters connected to the two cast-resin transformers on the three-phase side. One of the major advantages of the topology of the new HVDC transmission system is that standard power transformers can be used for it. The experimental and test setup will enable engineers to test the system characteristics of the new converter topology of an HVDC Plus system extensively under realistic conditions. This will also provide the basis for further advances.

WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL DIESEL ENGINE

THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL DIESEL ENGINE
(This page from the web is produced by Todd Walke)

The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan's Diesel United, Ltd built the first engines and is where some of these pictures were taken.

It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners like a single engine/single propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a bigger engine to propel them.

The cylinder bore is just under 38" and the stroke is just over 98". Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.

Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:

Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102 rpm

Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). Fuel consumption at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds 50% thermal efficiency. That is, more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion.

For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range.

Even at its most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.

A cross section of the RTA96C:


The internals of this engine are a bit different than most automotive engines. The top of the connecting rod is not attached directly to the piston. The top of the connecting rod attaches to a "crosshead" which rides in guide channels. A long piston rod then connects the crosshead to the piston.

Installing the "thin-shell" bearings. Crank & rod journals are 38" in diameter and 16" wide:


The crank sitting in the block (also known as a "gondola-style" bedplate). This is a 10 cylinder version. Note the steps by each crank throw that lead down into the crankcase:



A piston & piston rod assembly. The piston is at the top. The large square plate at the bottom is where the whole assembly attaches to the crosshead:




The "spikes" on the piston rods are hollow tubes that go into the holes you can see on the bottom of the pistons (left picture) and inject oil into the inside of the piston which keeps the top of the piston from overheating. Some high-performance auto engines have a similar feature where an oil squirter nozzle squirts oil onto the bottom of the piston.


The cylinder deck (10 cylinder version). Cylinder liners are die-cast ductile cast iron. Look at the size of those head studs!:



The first completed 12 cylinder engine:

LETHAL COMBINATION - PART II

LETHAL COMBINATION - PART II:

DDD’s BUBBLE BUSTED;
PACMAN IN RUNAWAY TRIUMPH

Doods A. Amora, PEE

June 30,2008

Some 24 hours ago, the phenom in a Filipino Fireball named Manny Pacquiao rendezvoused with history in an amazing fashion.

In a spectacle beamed to millions around the world, Pacquiao found his fourth world title – in the process annexing one more championship belt spread within the range of seven weight divisions. Stuffing fresh five pounds of additional firepower in his frame, Pacquiao in a masterpiece performance encapsulated the WBC 135-pound title belt (Sunday morning, Philippine Time), stopping and dethroning the erstwhile champion at Las Vegas’ Mandalay Bay Events Center.


Truly indeed, the fight saw both gladiators living up to their billings as ‘never-say-die’ brawlers. Both parties were industrious and relentless. And as work-rates constantly pumping into aggressive collisions, awesome blasts were heard in every tick of the fight - but alas, in a lopsided one!

Pacquiao did it with his revived signatures: blinding speed and power! At last, the world has witnessed the successful showcase of the long-overdue ‘Marco Bolo’ now performed to perfection inside the ring through countless gym rehearsals. And as envisioned, his opponent's chin did not last long. TKO in the ninth round! Referee Drakulich did not bother to count - as there will be no debate about it!

Pacquiao ended the carnage in the ninth round with a short - but devastating left that caught the durable champion on the chin sending him to the canvas in a loud thud, face down – ‘like sugarcane mowed down by an oversized sword’.


THE DANGEROUS DAVID DIAZ

The vanquished…? DDD – the “Dangerous David Diaz”!

DDD (now 34-2-1, 17 KO’s), in the aftermath of the bloody bout saw himself in deep cuts below his right eyebrow, his bridge of the nose oozing with coagulating fluids, eyes blackened & half-closed, lips swollen, in an entire facade of tormentous anguish.

Gracious however in defeat, the good-natured Diaz said: "Manny’s punches are just too fast. It was all his speed. He boxed much more than I thought he would."

"The cut didn't bother me," Diaz added. "But I thought he seemed to have a knife. It's like he was hitting me with a blade. What can I say? I lost today, I'll win tomorrow. To go like that with a guy like Manny Pacquiao, I think I'm doing pretty good."

Diaz had called the Sunday morning’s fight the biggest in his career. At $ 850,000, he was to receive the biggest paycheck so far in his lifetime. And winning this one would have been a big one. It would send him to the dreamland of the mega-bucked paradise. To David, Manny is his stepping stone, yet the Pacman could also be his stumbling block. A loss would be: quo vadis…, tu hombre?

But why not..? Ballooning with 29 pounds more cargo towards north, Pacquiao (now 47-3-2, 36 KO’s) started his pro career very light at 106 lbs as a lowly flyweight. On the other hand, Diaz launched his line of business heavy at light-welterweight and went south to lightweight where he found his championship.

Like Ortiz against Elorde, that supposedly meant he would be able to take Manny’s punches.

David’s an inside fighter – we all knew it.

His style is to crowd his opponent and the fight plan as I assumed, would be to rough up & bulldoze Pacman to the ropes and gain mental & physical advantage. Because he is physically bigger, I would like to think, ‘never mind two or three blows from the Pacman but a single blow of his own would be enough for Pacman to think twice’. Comes the ending rounds, as Pacman begins to lose steam…, that would be it – and it should be David’s sweet time! But alas … sorry, it did not come…

Truth to tell, my circle of friends after three rounds watching the fight, joked about that David Diaz must have planned as his defense to block Manny’s fists with his own face. It turned out that David himself did really make such a joke. In an internet article today, it says about David’s ‘strategy’ in combating Manny’s best weapon: “I think the best thing I can do is to meet his left hand with my face”, David as quoted. Of course it was a joke, but the ‘strategy’ was only half anticipated – because not only the left hands were coming in but also the blinding rights that made his swelling left cheek purple.

But then again, why not...? He had been successful before with title contender, Armando Sta. Cruz when far behind on points, he stopped Sta. Cruz in the ending rounds? It made him the Champion, wasn’t it? With Erik Morales, wasn’t his heart & industriousness in a full 12 round span did it? Stamina and work rate - aren’t they his best trademarks?

But then, with the Pacman as opponent, the 'bubble of durability' in David Diaz quickly burst right there & then at the very opening round!


THE FLAWLESS EXECUTION

Trainer Freddie Roach was noticeably pleased of the outcome. "He boxed better than he ever has. It was beautiful! We told him not to stand and trade in front of this guy, because David’s too dangerous”.

“We knew David Diaz was a strong guy. If we landed the combinations with Manny’s speed we knew we would out-speed him, but if we stood there and traded with him we would give him a chance to win the fight. The thing was not to step straight back but to step off to the side and then to turn him into another combination. And, it worked. We worked really hard in the gym and I am so proud of Manny’s right hand tonight. Diaz was looking for the left hand and the right hand was there all night long.”

Roach’s game plan worked perfectly as Pacquiao landed somewhat a one-sided ratio of 2.6 punches to 1. CompuBox statistics show Pacquiao's 230 stingers landing its mark out of 788 punches thrown, 180 of which were power punches. On the other hand, the confused Diaz only landed a dismal 90 out of only 463 throws. This translates into Pacman hitting Diaz 8.77 blows per minute in contrast to David’s 3.43 punches per minute.

Compare that to Pacman-Marquez II, in full 12 rounds, Pacman threw 619 blows while Marquez at 511. Pacman connected 157 punches (4.36 per minute) while Marquez at 172 (4.78 per minute). From the looks of it, "The Unfinished Business" was totally a different texture of a fight!

This time with Diaz, the Pacman circled around, jabbed and displayed an incredible arsenal of punches – a new manifestation of his being a complete fighter.

Unscathed, the Pacman hopped in and dished out three- and four-punch lethal combinations at a time, before quickly stepping out to recycle a recurring hurricane. Now a two-fisted warrior, Manny dominated Diaz with his right hand - throwing accurate & blinding jabs at will, the uppercuts, and the counter right hooks that couldn’t seem to miss its target in the whole 8-¾ round episode. After a few rounds, it then became clear that David Diaz was the perfect fighter for Manny to test the waters in his lightweight debut. As the fight progressed, Diaz launched punches with increasing frustration - frequently missing his eely opponent.

In his supremacy, Pacquiao won every canto on all three scorecards (by the way, mine included), with the scores at the end of the 8th reading 80-71 by two judges and 80-72 by one judge in his favor. Two judges must have scored a round with a 10-8. To compare, mine was a conservative 80-72.


A FOOTNOTE IN HISTORY

Before the June 29 date, the Pacman who started his pro career in 1995 as a 106 pounder had officially to his credit annexed three alphabet world titles. First was the WBC Flyweight (112 lbs), Manny then bypassed the Superfly and Bantamweight divisions to claim his second world title, the IBF Super Bantamweight Belt (122 lbs). Just last March 2008, Pacquiao grabbed the WBC Junior Lightweight Title (130 lbs) when he outpointed Juan Manuel Marquez.

It could have been four titles (and now should have been his fifth), if the featherweight (126 lbs) Ring Magazine’s Peoples’ Champion has to be included, when he knocked out then lineal champion Marco Antonio Barrera in 2003.

To recall, Pacquiao’s lightweight debut was filled with eyebrow–raising doubts. In my last article, I asked, “Can the Pacman withstand the blows of a lightweight/welterweight? On the other hand, can the power of a super-featherweight jolt a much-bigger opponent? Or, moving up in weight - an advantage or disadvantage?”

But all questions & apprehensions by critics including me have now been proven wrong and thus erased to naught. Pacquiao was too superior, too quick for Diaz. Using his newly mastered boxing skills, Manny dominated the much-bigger American in his own territory. But to me, David's loss to Manny is something not to be ashamed of. He has just shown the gallantry and serious fighting attitude only found in few boxers, these days.


CLOSURE

DDD, “Dangerous David Diaz” after all, as Bro Noel’s Brod Cesar said, DDD actually means now as, “Dangerous Dili Diay”… at least if Manny is the opponent.

To “Big Bro” Noel Fernandez of EAUC, “Brother Ely” of PEPSCOR, Jun, the “Erik Morales” Leyteno (este, not Latino) copycat, Cesar, (by the way, not the Fil-Jap mestizo) but the brother of Noel, to Loyde & Francis and to all others sharing with me in the live coverage; we all agreed that Pacquiao definitely is now a compleat skilled fighter. With his legendary speed, power, heart and stamina and now a new-found mastery of defense, we would like to think that Manny is invincible in his new found home at 135 lbs.

Valero? Campbell, Casamayor? Without doubt, I would root 150% for the Pacman – whatever happens!

But with Juan Manuel Marquez, it remains to be seen. I have the feeling just as I’m afraid; JMM is Pacman’s kryptonite. But if Pacman trains seriously at 135, there’s no way that Marquez can overpower Pacquiao.

Hatton? Ah, later… he can wait! That to me is retirement time with 20 million green bucks hanging on the line, just as Mayweather did!


Doods
June 30, 2008