Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Engineering

Site Office

Please leave hard hats, boots and tools outside.

Make yourself comfortable, we have work to discuss!

Welcome to the Engineers Site Office. This is where engineers gather and check in when they have project tasks to organise and carry out.

This page is to discuss anything related to WikiProject Engineering and issues of ongoing concern.

More articles or pages in need of attention could be found here at Category:Unreferenced Engineering articles and Category:Engineering articles needing attention.

Uncertain hydraulic valve type

What is a biplane valve? From googling, it appears to be similar to a butterfly valve and used in similar large-diameter high-flow applications such as dam outflow, but I can't find anything about its actual design. DMacks (talk) 04:51, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

A biplane valve IS a butterfly valve. Its closure just uses two spaced plates joined by ribs instead of a single solid disc. Typically, one plate carries the seal and the other provides reinforcement. Together they work like an I-beam: spacing the material away from the neutral axis increases bending stiffness, allowing the assembly to withstand a larger pressure without the bulk of a thicker disc.

The plates rotate together through a quarter-turn. Fully open, they align with the flow, allowing water to pass between them as well as around them. This can give a lower pressure drop than a thick conventional disc while having larger deformation resistance of a thicker disc. All the while retaining the short face-to-face length and quarter turn action of a butterfly valve. Logosys (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Raymond Edward Perrault

Is this engineer notable? If yes, please address reliable sources. If not, please send to WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Nominated. TheResilientEngineer (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Where to Put Peak-Discharge Models (TR-55, Rational)

I was amazed to realize that there appears to be no reference on Wikipedia to hydrologic peak discharge estimation models like NRCS TR-55 or the Rational Method. I use both of these regularly in stormwater management efforts as a civil engineer, chiefly to size stormwater infrastructure like culverts, sewers, detention basins, etc.

I would like to write up some information on these, I am currently struggling to find a good place to put them. Hydrological model seems like an obvious option, but the current structure doesn't really have room for these. I've also considered Surface runoff, Stormwater, and Runoff model (reservoir), but none of them feel quite right. Suggestions? Civilbeard (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Consider creating a brand new, standalone article. Include as much material as seems fit. Include as many good sources as you can find. When you're done, post here again, and people can look at it, and determine if it should remain standalone or be merged with other articles. Noleander (talk) 19:14, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Oh there's an idea I hadn't considered! I'll look into doing that. Good call on having multiple sources; I was initially just planning on citing the hydrology textbook I've been using for a decade as well as the TR-55 publication itself. Thanks! Civilbeard (talk) 19:19, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

If you write a new article, you can submit it to WP:Did you know (article must be >= 1,500 characters) and it will appear on the Wikipedia main page (must submit within 7 days of completing the artice). Also, you can submit it to WP:Good Articles and get a GA award (no size limits or deadlines). If you have any questions about how to format a new article, or layout the citations, etc, let me know and I can give you some tips. Noleander (talk) 19:26, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Road article

Hey there, I opened a thread at Talk:Road#Image regarding the choice of the leading image. I'd be grateful for any comments left there. Best, A09|(talk) 19:43, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Requests section on the project main page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Engineering#Requests ain't actively used and I don't see it still serving its original purpose. Either way, the main pages should be static with dynamic content through templates only. Any ideas? Otherwise I'll remove it. Killarnee (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Concur with removing that section. This talk page is a better solution for making requests. - Civilbeard (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

I did update the page now, also including creating a new page clean (I haven't been sure about this first, but when I checked everyone for the one year activity, it's been a mess that the list is mixed with the other wikiproject content) for the participants list Wikipedia:WikiProject Engineering/Participants, and I did reorder the sections and removed some link rot. I kept much of the original text but rewrote it so it sounds more professional. Feedback is welcome. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to include User:AlexNewArtBot/EngineeringSearchResult as a template in the page because that list is somehow too heavy for the parser and prevents some (not all?) further templates from loading. Killarnee (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Article merger proposal at Talk:Gravity sewer

Requesting input on new thread about merging Gravity sewer into Sanitary sewer.

Talk:Gravity sewer#Proposal: Merge this article into Sanitary sewer. - Civilbeard (talk) 14:41, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

SolidWorks modeling technology

Hello editors! I have an open request on the SolidWorks Talk page for a request to update the Modeling Technology section. The information is currently very outdated and the draft I presented updates it to include information on today's technology. This request was made on behalf of my work at Beutler Ink. Thank you very much! Stephanie BINK (talk) 21:10, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Requested article: Boundary flux (membrane engineering)

I have added Boundary flux to the requested articles list under Chemical/Process engineering. It is a membrane-filtration concept introduced in 2014 as a unified framework for critical and threshold flux, and it has subsequently been discussed and applied by independent research groups in MF, NF and RO.

Some independent sources include:

• Li et al., Journal of Environmental Sciences 43 (2016), 106–117, doi:10.1016/j.jes.2015.09.007
• Zhu et al., Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 67 (2016), 11–19, doi:10.1016/j.jtice.2016.07.004
• Ahmed et al., Desalination 469 (2019), 114092, doi:10.1016/j.desal.2019.114092
• Wen et al., Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 12 (2024), 111974, doi:10.1016/j.jece.2024.111974

I have a COI because I am a co-author of the original 2014 paper, which I have disclosed on my user page. I am therefore not asking for support for the topic and will not create the article myself; I am only seeking independent assessment from editors familiar with membrane/process engineering.

Stollysoft74 (talk) 23:22, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

@Stollysoft74: It would be great when you create that article in the Wikipedia:Draft namespace and someone will review and move it to the main namespace for you. We need experts and the draft namespace is for things like COI. Killarnee (talk) 19:56, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, that sounds like a good approach.

I will prepare a neutral draft at Draft:Boundary flux, using mainly independent secondary and peer-reviewed sources, and keeping my COI clearly disclosed. Once it is ready, I will submit it for independent review rather than moving it to mainspace myself.

Thank you for the guidance. Stollysoft74 (talk) 21:51, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Featured Article Review on Pennsylvania State Capitol initiated

I have nominated Pennsylvania State Capitol for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). George Ho (talk) 03:35, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Thermal contact

Please add reliable sources. Thank you for your time and expertise. Bearian (talk) 08:53, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian - That seems like it is more in the field of physics than engineering, since thermodynamics is part of physics. So Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics might be more appropriate for inquiries. Thermal contact is a tiny article with only about 60 words, ... so another option is to simply merge it into the larger and more visible Thermal conduction article. Of course, in either case, those 60 words need WP:Reliable sources. If you have time to look for sources, you can try Internet Archive, for example

• https://archive.org/details/thermodynamicsst0000asto
• https://archive.org/details/handbookoftherma0002yaws_y7b1
• https://archive.org/details/DTIC_AD0687474
• https://archive.org/details/nasa_techdoc_19640019599

Noleander (talk) 12:10, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I've only taught STEM and Physics at the secondary school level. Bearian (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian - It is common for editors to locate and supply sources for articles, even if the articles are in an area outside the editor's expertise. There is no requirement that editors must be experts in, say, thermodynamics to edit the thermodynamics article. I wrote the bridge article and found 100% of the sources, yet I am not a civil engineer (I'm a software engineer). So you should feel free to find and add sources to Thermal contact. Tools you can use to find sources:

• WP:Resource exchange (RX)
• WP:The Wikipedia Library (TWL)
• Google scholar
• Internet Archive

I use frequently use those to find sources on topics I'm not an expert in. WP:The Wikipedia Library is especially good because it gives you full access to tens of thousands of top-quality journal articles. Noleander (talk) 16:33, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Please improve Power systems CAD

The current page Power systems CAD has three sources, none of which verify anything, with the majority of the page unsourced. While it survived an AfD in 2007 I doubt it will now. I am dubious that the topic is notable, the only sources I see are commercial sites. If someone improves it great, otherwise I will PROD/AfD it. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:47, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

@Ldm1954: That is a mix of about an app and a use case of an app category and that's hard to improve. We already have power engineering software. "The use of personal computers with graphical displays lead to development..." reads like an ad or manual from the 2000s. CAD ain't even a fitting word, I can think of the intention for using the word CAD, but CAD is more about designing a product, for grids you need controls and simulations. The previous AfD was more like a courtesy keep with the original author voting themselves and the other two read like let's see what happens if we keep but they don't sound convinced. I do recommend AfD. Killarnee (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I pondered a redirect to Power system simulation although that page is also badly sourced. Any other plausible targets? Ldm1954 (talk) 21:16, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

I will just redirect to power engineering software and AfD is anyone objects. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:17, 21 October 2026 (UTC)