Comment

Comment by Parag Naukarkar on July 7, 2014 at 11:46pm

Introduction:

Hello Group...

I am writing this email to introduce my company, Vedant Resources & Infrastructure Development.

 

We are a young and dynamic company from Pune, India 

 

Our Engineering Services include:   

• Design & Engineering: (Heat Exchangers, Pressure Vessels, Storage Tanks, Boilers & Chimney)

• Process Engineering:(Mass & Energy Balance, PFD, P&ID, Process Data Sheets, Equipment Layout & Elevation ,Plant Layout & Elevation)

• Piping Engineering: (P&ID, Piping Layouts, Isometrics, Thermal Stress Analysis, BOM/MTO)

• Knowledge - Software & Simulations: (Process Simulation S/W -ASPEN-HYSIS-CHEMCAD, VB Based Programming, Modeling -SolidWorks, Etc., Piping Engineering -PDMS, etc.)

 

Our corporate training for following modules:

1. ASME Section VIII Division-1 (Pressure Vessel Design Code)
2. ASME B31.3 (Process Piping Code)
3. API-510 (Inservice Inspection Code)
4. Awareness of ASME Codes (ASME Section I, II, V, VIII, IX)
5. Basic Metallurgy for Fresher
6. Other subjects (custom designed for client such as Section-I Boiler design, Damage Mechanisms and Material Properties, etc. and API-570, API-653, Etc)

 

FEA / CAE Services:

• Static Analysis-Linear Elastic and Non Linear
• Dynamic Analysis-Implicit / Explicit (Modal, Harmonic, Transient …)
• Advanced Non Linear Analysis
• Thermal Analysis
• Fatigue Analysis
• Coupled Field Analysis
• Computational Fluid Dynamics

 

Please do let me know if there are any opportunities where we can assist you.

 

Look forward to hearing from you soon. 

 

 

Regards,

 

Parag Naukarkar

CEO l FOUNDER

Vedant Resources & Infrastructure Development,

Pune, India

URL: www.EngineeringToIndia.com

http://www.engineeringtoindia.com/pages/AboutUs.aspx

http://www.engineeringtoindia.com/pages/Office_set_Up_India.aspx 

 

Comment by Italo DeBlasi on September 5, 2012 at 7:32am

Hi all. I have had experience in designing nuclear powerplant expansion joints. Although this industry has waned its time is yet to come.

Comment by Ross McNeilage on December 10, 2010 at 6:36pm

Hi everyone.

I belong to Green, entrepreneur and Windpower exchanges.

 

It looks like Australia is mostly made of this stuff,

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium

 

Is it just me or does this stuff look like the solution to all the negative aspects of nuclear energy production?

The infrastructure costs might be significantly more but the benefits wouyld certainly outweigh the costs..

Any thoughts

 

Thanks

Cheers

Ross

Melbourne Australia

Comment by Ahmad Makky on October 13, 2010 at 3:51am

Hey everybody...

I want the best sources for nuclear physics books

thanx..

Comment by Taylor Johnson on November 19, 2009 at 11:36am

I found this article today from FOX. An interesting view on the "Future of Nuclear Power". Thought you guys might be interested. http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/future-of-nuclear-power

Comment by Dan harvey on November 10, 2009 at 10:26am

In response to Blake's Question: I think it really depends on whether we learn from the mistakes of the past and of other nations as to the direction of Nuclear power in America.
Currently (Someone correct me, my data is a little dated) there are about 100 operating nuclear facilities in the US, there is 1 at 99% in Tennessee, and there are plans for at least 2 new reactors to be built by two consortiums within the next decade.
Our present commercial fleet is suppling roughly 22% of all electricity consumed in the US, and that number will decrease over the next 40 years as reactors shut.
Imperative to the future of Commercial Nuclear power is the completion of the Yucca Mountain repository facility or one similar. Included in that is the repeal of the Federal law prohibiting the recycling of spent fuel. If we could "recycle" spent fuel, we would increase the "useable" life of many, currently, stored fuel assemblies.
Is there a future for Nuclear in the US? YES.
Is it an uphill battle? Absolutely.
Is it the best, most efficient way to supply America the power she needs? Without a doubt.
It's cleaner, safer, more stable, and cheaper than ANY other available power source.

Comment by Jim Hill on October 26, 2009 at 12:02pm

Possible, yes... practical, maybe... Safe no way. I like my reactors with several tons of control rods ready to SCRAM.

Comment by Brenden Heidrich on October 26, 2009 at 8:35am

Yes. Nuclear thermal propulsion was investigated in the late 1960's. It will spew radioactive coolant out the back of the rocket, but it does work. Better used in space. Nuclear pulsed propulsion is even better for either mission, but it had to be done at one of the magnetic poles because of the EMP. Gotta love Project Plowshare.

Comment by Blake Richardson on October 15, 2009 at 4:36am

George, I mentioned to Taylor as well, I would enjoy talking to you more, please check out my companys website www.energyandprocess.com.. I would enjoy networking with you.. Have a great day.. Blake

Comment by George Pollock on October 14, 2009 at 8:00pm

Thanks for the link, Taylor. Words used were not "building" but more like "planning to study", or, in other words, no action. No dirt turned, concrete poured. Just plans to study.

Yucca Flats has been discussed for at least a decade and no forward motion on that project is seen. More talks, studies. No concrete.

Some years ago, the California voters passed a law that banned future reactors in California until the waste disposal problem was solved. That makes waste disposal a show-stopper in California.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page