Brian
First of all, it hardly behooves anyone to curtly contest remarks made
by someone as distinguished as Dr. Wark, unless they can demonstrate
conquerable
credentials. Holding a position in Mechanical Engineering at Purdue
University is about as high a recommendation as I can envision. Perhaps this
is because you do not understand the thermodynamic analysis presented in Dr.
Wark's remarks. I did not attend Purdue so I do not have a hidden agenda.
To your point, lets discuss what Dr. Wark actually did write and that I
quoted earlier; in particular that the wet bulb temperature is a close
approximation to the adiabatic saturation temperature which is one of the
parameters
needed to determine the dew point. (The difference in these
values is best demonstrated using a T-S diagram which you will find in
any undergraduate thermodynamics text book.) This is an important point
since
adiabatic processes exist only in theory.
I find your quotation below to be essentially in agreement with Dr. Wark's
analysis although very short on analytical details.
Dr. Wark's analysis is much more meticulous as he begins with the basic
definitions associated with a mixture of gases and then develops the
psychometric chart and discusses the measurements and assumptions related to
its use. This same analysis is presented in many other text books treating
basic thermodynamics. I am sure you will agree that using the psychometric
chart without an understanding the thermodynamic background is dangerous at
best.
You earlier stated that the psychometric chart is notoriously inaccurate,
which is ridiculous. The error normally encountered in using the
psychometric chart is in direct proportion to the extent that the
measurement process varies from adiabatic. The chart itself is simply an
expression of the basic definitions of a mixture of non-reacting gases.
By the way, you may have a typo in your example. If the
dry bulb temperature is 65 the partial pressure of the water vapor becomes
zero at a wet bulb temperature of approximately 58 degrees. You quoted a wet
bulb temperature of 50 degrees which due to vapor pressure considerations is
physically impossible. You also quoted a relative humidity of 32.4%. This
corresponds to a wet bulb
temperature of about 60 degrees, which may have been the wet bulb
temperature you intended. I am using the psychometric chart published and
copyrighted by GE.
Best regards
Lee
J. Lee Parker, Ph.D.
JLP Consultants LLC
804 779 3389
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Ellis" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "TechNet E-Mail Forum" <[log in to unmask]>; "Lee parker" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: [TN] Humidity?
> I'm sorry, but Dr Wark is wrong if he equates dew point and wet bulb
> temperature. Enc. Brit., states under the heading "psychrometer" states:
> "a hygrometer composed of two similar thermometers. The bulb of one
> thermometer is kept wet (by means of a thin, wet cloth wick) so that the
> cooling that results from evaporation makes it register a lower
> temperature than the dry-bulb thermometer. When readings are taken
> simultaneously, it is possible (with the use of psychrometric tables) to
> determine the relative humidity and dew-point temperature of the air. A
> decrease in the humidity of the air brings an increase in the difference
> between dry- and wet-bulb temperatures, called the wet-bulb
> depression.". Note it states that the dew point can be determined from
> the psychrometric tables.
>
> To support this, an example is given in, for a psychrometry chart,
> http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~mdarre/NE-127/NewFiles/psychrometric_inset.html
> :
> "A sling psychrometer gives a dry-bulb temperature of 78oF and a
> wet-bulb temperature of 65oF. Determine other moist air properties from
> this information. Two useful air properties for environmental analysis
> in agricultural buildings would be relative humidity and dewpoint
> temperature. Relative humidity is an indicator of how much moisture is
> in the air compared to desirable moisture conditions, and dewpoint
> temperature indicates when condensation problems would occur should the
> (dry-bulb) temperature drop. Find the intersection of the two known
> properties, dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures, on the psychrometric
> chart, Figure 1. The dry-bulb temperature is located along the bottom
> horizontal axis. Find the line for 78oF, which runs vertically through
> the chart. Wet-bulb temperature is located along diagonal dotted lines
> leading to scale readings at the upper, curved boundary marked
> "saturation temperature". The intersection of the vertical 78oF dry-bulb
> line and the diagonal 65oF wet-bulb line has now established a "state
> point" for the measured air. Now read relative humidity as 50 percent
> (curving line running from left to right up through the chart) and
> dewpoint temperature as 58oF (follow horizontal line, moving left,
> toward the curved upper boundary of saturation temperatures)."
>
> Note the difference between Tw wet bulb and Td dew point. This is
> confirmed in another example contained in
> http://info.wlu.ca/~wwwgeog/courses/gg101web/labs/gg101winter2006lab5background.pdf
> and yet again at http://www.raiza.com/psycexcel1.html
>
> Then, if you use the EZAir psychrometric software and enter some
> arbitrary values, you will get answers like:
> 11/07/2006 Calculated Psychrometric Properties
> -------------------------------------
> Dry Bulb Temp = 65.0 deg F
> Wet Bulb Temp = 50.0 deg F
> Dew Point Temp = 34.8 deg F
> Relative Humidity = 32.4%
> Humidity Ratio (grains) = 29.6 grains
> Humidity Ratio (W) = 0.00422 lb. water/lb. dry air
> Specific Volume = 13.317 ft3 per Lb.
> Enthalpy = 20.2 Btu/lb.
>
> Even in my Physics text book (Starling and Woodall, 1950) from when I
> was a student over 50 years ago, it states The temperature of the wet
> bulb can in no case descend to the dew point, for, if it did,
> evaporation into the surrounding layer of air (supposed also reduced to
> this temperature) must cease, and heat leaking to the bulb from the stem
> of the thermometer would once again cause the temperature to rise. It
> follows that the wet bulb attains some temperature between the dry-bulb
> reading (i.e. air temperature) and the dew point. The ratio of the
> dew-point depression to the wet-bulb depression is known as Glaisher's
> Factor."
>
> I am not a physicist but I worked on hygrometric instrumentation as part
> of my Insulohmeter SIR tester and I developed a modified Assmann
> psychrometer to go into the climatic chamber. As none of the
> psychrometric tables went as high as 95°C/95% RH, I developed
> empirically the software which calculated RH from the two values (using
> Pt100 sensors). For this calibration, I used dew point to determine the
> RH and I know damn well that there is ALWAYS a difference between Td and
> Tw (very small though it is at high temps and/or humidity.). This may
> not be text book "knowledge" but real, down-to-earth, pragmatic knowledge.
>
> Brian
>
>
> Lee parker wrote:
> > Brian
> >
> > Rather than getting into a protracted discussion with you on our
> > opinions
> > concerning this issue, I will instead simply quote from a recognized
> > text
> > "Thermodynamics" by Kenneth Wark. Dr. Wark taught Thermodynamics at
> > Purdue
> > University and his text has been used at over 20 engineering schools
> > through
> > out the country. In fact I used his text when I taught undergraduate
> > thermodynamics.
> >
> > To quote Dr. Wark
> > "It is found that, for air- water-vapor mixtures at normal temperatures
> > and
> > pressures, the wet bulb temperature, the determination of which relies
> > on
> > the heat- and mass-transfer rates, is close in value the the
> > adiabatic-saturation temperature. The temperature T2 used in Eq 11-35
> > (the
> > dew point temperature) to obtain the humidity ratio is normally the wet
> > bulb
> > temperature, and this leads to an answer of sufficiency accuracy."
> >
> > Your definition of the dew point and the dry bulb temperatures are
> > measurement techniques not definitions. The dew point is the adiabatic
> > saturation temperature. This measurement requires the adiabatic mixing
> > of
> > the principal fluid (air) with moisture which in turn requires no change
> > in
> > entropy, a violation of the Second Law. Both measurements you described
> > produce a heat exchange and so both are approximations and we refer to
> > these
> > as wet bulb measurements. Probably, the most accurate technique for
> > measuring dew point is to slowly move air through a channel that is
> > partially filled with water. The channel is insulated and the heat
> > transfer
> > through the channel is minimized. The channel must be long enough to
> > produce
> > equilibrium. Normally this requires a very long channel, but is done
> > when an
> > extremely accurate measurement is necessary. This technique is described
> > in
> > most thermodynamic text books.
> >
> > I would very much like to know your bases for degrading the accuracy of
> > the
> > Psychometric Chart. These are first principal definitions. This is
> > tantamount to criticizing the accuracy of Algebra, Calculus or the
> > Periodic
> > Chart. The error is not in the chart, but in the measurements used to
> > enter
> > the chart.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Lee
> >
> > J. Lee Parker, Ph.D.
> > JLP Consultants LLC
> > 804 779 3389
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Ellis" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: "TechNet E-Mail Forum" <[log in to unmask]>; "Lee parker"
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 11:44 AM
> > Subject: Re: [TN] Humidity?
> >
> >
> >> Sorry, but dew point and wet bulb temp are not the same. Dew point is
> >> the temperature at which condensation will occur on a mirror surface
> >> under given static conditions. The wet bulb shows the temperature
> >> depression due to the loss of heat of vapourisation of water under
> >> dynamic conditions, usually by whirling a psychrometer at a given
> >> speed.
> >>
> >> Referring to the Smithsonian Meteorological Tables, if the measured dew
> >> point is 10°C and the temp is 20°C, the RH is 53%. According to the US
> >> Weather Bureau #1071, if the wet bulb temp is 10°C and the dry bulb
> >> temp
> >> is 20°C, the RH is 24%. In my book 53 and 24 are not the "same
> >> measurement".
> >>
> >> In any case, the W&D psychrometer is notoriously inaccurate (typically
> >> ±15% RH errors are possible in the usual temperature range of 5°-35°C)
> >> as there are many undefined variables. The dew point method is much
> >> more
> >> accurate but the instruments are very costly. Absolute humidity
> >> expressed as the weight of water vapour per unit volume of air (g/m3)
> >> at
> >> a given temperature and barometric pressure is the only scientific
> >> metric and this can be correlated to dew point at any temperature
> >> within
> >> about ±1%, but not easily to relative humidity as barometric pressure
> >> plays a role.
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >> Lee parker wrote:
> >>> Folks
> >>>
> >>> There has been a lot of chatter concerning dew points, relative
> >>> humidity
> >>> and
> >>> temperature.
> >>> (The dew point and wet bulb temperature are different names for the
> >>> same
> >>> measurement.) These three measurements are uniquely related
> >>> thermodynamic
> >>> properties. For instant, temperature and relative humidity uniquely
> >>> define
> >>> the dew point (i.e. wet bulb temperature). The relationship between
> >>> the
> >>> three is normally displayed in most thermodynamic text books (the kind
> >>> Mechanical Engineers use) as the so called Psychometric Chart. The
> >>> relationships are not linear which explainers why it is difficult to
> >>> reach a
> >>> relative humidity of 100%.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards
> >>>
> >>> Lee
> >>>
> >>> J. Lee Parker, Ph.D.
> >>> JLP Consultants LLC
> >>> 804 779 3389
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Brian Ellis" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 10:51 AM
> >>> Subject: Re: [TN] Humidity?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If you look at http://www.cypenv.org/weather/wx2.htm you can see
> >>> today's
> >>> weather measure by my weather station. I invite you to note the
> >>> following:
> >>> 1. temp at 1200 was ~32°C and RH was high at ~38%
> >>> 2. between 1200 and 1245, the temp dropped to 28° because the sun was
> >>> obscured by the formation of towering cumulus and cumulonimbus.
> >>> 3. at 1245, a minor thunderstorm started
> >>> 4. by 1305, 1 mm of rain had fallen and the temp had dropped to 21°C,
> >>> while the RH had risen to a peak of a whopping (for here) 67% by 1325
> >>> 5. Note the dewpoint was substantially constant at 14-16 °C during
> >>> this
> >>> episode
> >>> 6. it took a couple of hours or so after the rain for "normal service
> >>> to
> >>> be resumed"
> >>> 7. the thunderstorm was accompanied by gusty wind conditions: these
> >>> winds were katabatic, coming from the direction of a nearby mountain;
> >>> this is quite usual
> >>> 8. as is usual during thunderstorms, the barometric pressure rose by
> >>> about a hectopascal (millibar)
> >>> 9. the RH has a strong inverse relationship to temperature (shown over
> >>> the whole graph, whereas the dew point does not. In fact, during the
> >>> storm, if there is a tendency, it goes proportionally to temperature.
> >>> 10. during the period from 1330 to 1530, evaporation was high due to
> >>> solar radiation and it felt very uncomfortable despite the low
> >>> temperature of 24-28°C; this was because the evaporation was almost
> >>> being visibly sucked to higher altitudes and forming small clouds at
> >>> ~1000 to 2000 m. This is why the humidity was lower than one would
> >>> instinctively think.
> >>>
> >>> At http://www.cypenv.org/weather/wx3.htm, you can see the same kind of
> >>> thing for 6 July, but with a more violent storm, dropping 11.4 mm of
> >>> rain in 25 minutes. Note the more distinct barometer blip.
> >>>
> >>> Note these graphs progress with time, so don't wait to look at them!
> >>>
> >>> I agree that 100% RH is the max: one would drown above that, except in
> >>> a
> >>> rare case of supersaturation, which can happen only if there are no
> >>> condensation nuclei in the air, which would be almost impossible at
> >>> ground level. 100% would result in very thick fog, starting at 90-95%,
> >>> mist at ~85% and haze at 75% (approximations, depending on
> >>> temperature,
> >>> nucleation, wind, barometric pressure etc.). I believe 102% is a
> >>> journalistic exaggeration (or a badly calibrated instrument!!!). I
> >>> agree
> >>> that a Florida summer rainstorm can look worse than a steamy tropical
> >>> rain forest, but the steaminess dissipates, along with the resultant
> >>> low
> >>> level cloud formation almost as soon as the sun re-appears.
> >>>
> >>> FYI, my instruments are correct to within ±½°C, ±4% RH between 0° and
> >>> 45°C, ±2 hPa, corrected to sea level, ±1 m/s after computer
> >>> corrections.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, the point I was trying to make but expressed badly is that
> >>> when
> >>> the temp and humidity are both high, the cloud formation is such that
> >>> the humidity at ground level drops very rapidly if there is no further
> >>> precipitation. Yes, higher humidity peaks are very possible, but they
> >>> level out rapidly at high temps. I should have added "sustained"
> >>> humidity! :)
> >>>
> >>> Brian
> >>>
> >>> Wrobel, Clayton wrote:
> >>>> I haven't measured it myself, but the local weather often reports RH
> >>>> greater than 70% here in Florida. An observation I have made: After
> >>>> one
> >>>> of our afternoon showers the temperature rapidly returns to 90+,
> >>>> visibility is less than 1 mile doe to haze, and one can see steam
> >>>> rising
> >>>> from the ground. It Feels, and smells, just like a sauna.
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Dehoyos, Ramon [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 9:06 AM
> >>>> Subject: Re: Humidity?
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Rudy et al:
> >>>> Good article about understanding humidity,
> >>>> http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/2002-12-01-answers-dp-relhum_x.htm
> >>>> ` Ramon
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of R Sedlak
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 3:45 PM
> >>>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>>> Subject: [TN] Humidity?
> >>>>
> >>>> Unclear how much time you have spent near the equator....
> >>>>
> >>>> But, I suspect not a whole lot....
> >>>>
> >>>> Humidity far in excess of 100% is common... or at least it feels that
> >>>> way.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have experience periods in excess of 5 years, this in less than a
> >>>> month,
> >>>> where the temperature sometimes fell to 30 C, but the REPORTED
> >>>> humidity
> >>>> was never below 90%....
> >>>>
> >>>> It makes you understand why suicide bombers may just be seeking some
> >>>> relief.
> >>>>
> >>>> Rudy Sedlak
> >>>>
> >>>> Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]> wrote: I have discovered that there is
> >>>> a
> >>>> real limit to the conditions of natural temperature and humidity that
> >>>> are
> >>>> possible. To put it simply, if the temperature and humidity are high
> >>>> at
> >>>> ground level, clouds will form at a given altitude, reflecting solar
> >>>> radiation. This will result in a lowering of the temperature. I
> >>>> haven't
> >>>> yet determined the exact limit conditions, but it would seem that
> >>>> (very
> >>>> roughly), you can obtain 100% RH only if the temperature is under
> >>>> about
> >>>> 15°C. At 25°C, the max humidity is ~85%. At 35°C, 75%. At 50°C, 55%.
> >>>>
> >>>> When I have more exact data, it is clear I'll be able to determine a
> >>>> limit
> >>>> curve, on the right side of which it will be impossible for natural
> >>>> conditions to exist. However, we can create conditions in climatic
> >>>> chambers which will be far to the right of the curve, and we use such
> >>>> conditions in SIR/ECMR testing. Are we exaggerating when we pump up
> >>>> the
> >>>> temperature and humidity to excessive levels, to create conditions
> >>>> which
> >>>> can never occur in real life? Is there even a rationale to do so?
> >>>> Remember
> >>>> that the inside of an enclosure with active electronics is warmer
> >>>> than
> >>>> ambient. The real dangerous conditions are with high humidities,
> >>>> which
> >>>> can
> >>>> occur only at artificially low temperatures, such as when going into
> >>>> a
> >>>> tropical rain forest conditions from an over-air-conditioned room
> >>>> (e.g.,
> >>>> 20°C to 30°C/80% RH), when condensation may occur for a short time.
> >>>>
> >>>> Views are welcome, please.
> >>>>
> >>>> Brian
> >>>> --
> >>>> http://www.cypenv.org Cyprus environment/energy
> >>>> http://www.cypenv.org/worldenv World environment/energy
> >>>> http://www.cypenv.org/weather Cyprus weather
> >>>> http://www.cypenv.org/smf/index.php Environment/energy forums
> >>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cypnature/ Cyprus nature forum
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To
> >>>> unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> >>>> in
> >>>> the
> >>>> BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
> >>>> (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET
> >>>> Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the
> >>>> posts:
> >>>> send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the
> >>>> archives
> >>>> of
> >>>> previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC
> >>>> web
> >>>> site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
> >>>> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> >>>> 847-615-7100
> >>>> ext.2815
> >>>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To
> >>>> unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> >>>> in
> >>>> the
> >>>> BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
> >>>> (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET
> >>>> Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the
> >>>> posts:
> >>>> send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the
> >>>> archives
> >>>> of
> >>>> previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC
> >>>> web
> >>>> site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
> >>>> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> >>>> 847-615-7100
> >>>> ext.2815
> >>>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To
> >>>> unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> >>>> in
> >>>> the
> >>>> BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
> >>>> (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET
> >>>> Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the
> >>>> posts:
> >>>> send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the
> >>>> archives
> >>>> of
> >>>> previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC
> >>>> web
> >>>> site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
> >>>> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> >>>> 847-615-7100
> >>>> ext.2815
> >>>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
> >>>> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
> >>>> text
> >>>> in
> >>>> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
> >>>> To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
> >>>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> >>>> To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
> >>>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
> >>>> Search the archives of previous posts at:
> >>>> http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
> >>>> Please visit IPC web site
> >>>> http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
> >>>> for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at
> >>>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>> or
> >>>> 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> >>>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://www.cypenv.org Cyprus environment/energy
> >>> http://www.cypenv.org/worldenv World environment/energy
> >>> http://www.cypenv.org/weather Cyprus weather
> >>> http://www.cypenv.org/smf/index.php Environment/energy forums
> >>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cypnature/ Cyprus nature forum
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
> >>> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> >>> in
> >>> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
> >>> To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
> >>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> >>> To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
> >>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
> >>> Search the archives of previous posts at:
> >>> http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
> >>> Please visit IPC web site
> >>> http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
> >>> for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at
> >>> [log in to unmask]
> >>> or
> >>> 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> >>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
> >>> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> >>> in
> >>> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
> >>> To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
> >>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> >>> To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
> >>> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
> >>> Search the archives of previous posts at:
> >>> http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
> >>> Please visit IPC web site
> >>> http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
> >>> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> >>> 847-615-7100
> >>> ext.2815
> >>> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >> --
> >> http://www.cypenv.org Cyprus environment/energy
> >> http://www.cypenv.org/worldenv World environment/energy
> >> http://www.cypenv.org/weather Cyprus weather
> >> http://www.cypenv.org/smf/index.php Environment/energy forums
> >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cypnature/ Cyprus nature forum
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> > in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
> > To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
> > [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> > To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
> > [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
> > Search the archives of previous posts at:
> > http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
> > Please visit IPC web site
> > http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100
> > ext.2815
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> >
>
> --
> http://www.cypenv.org Cyprus environment/energy
> http://www.cypenv.org/worldenv World environment/energy
> http://www.cypenv.org/weather Cyprus weather
> http://www.cypenv.org/smf/index.php Environment/energy forums
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cypnature/ Cyprus nature forum
>
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
|
