Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

مرکز مدیریت ریسک، ایمنی فرآیند و کاهش خسارات دانشگاه صنعت نفت (PRPLC)

@PRPLC_PUT

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry

137subscribers

+4 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1003743539355
TypeChannel
Username@PRPLC_PUT
Descriptionارتباط با ادمین @PRPLC1
CreatedBetween 1 February 2026 and 30 June 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded8 August 2026
Last confirmed live8 August 2026
Measurements held3
On Telegramt.me/PRPLC_PUT

Growth

1331371356 August 2026 — 133 subscribers6 August 2026 — 137 subscribers8 August 2026 — 137 subscribers6 August 20268 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 3 days, net +4. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 132–138 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
8 Aug 2026, 23:16137no change
6 Aug 2026, 22:06137+4
6 Aug 2026, 08:16133first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 6 August 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
44.9%
avg views ÷ 137 subscribers
Avg views / post
61.5
20 posts measured
Reaction rate
0%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
20
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 1 of 20 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 8 August 2026
Posts held20 (6 August 20268 August 2026)
Views total1,229
Reactions total0
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 23:16 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Photos
26
Videos
2
Links
29

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 8 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.

Recent posts

8 Aug 2026, 12:59 UTC40 viewsread 8 August 2026
Photo

🚨 هفت روز با یک رویداد فرآیندی رویداد سوم | انفجار هیتر ایستگاه تقلیل فشار گاز روز اول | شرح سناریوی رویداد ⚠️ دو نفر از کارکنان پیمانکار تعمیرات، برای بازدید روزانه به محل ایستگاه CGS مراجعه می‌کنند. در جریان بازدید، مشاهده می‌شود که یکی از دو مشعل هیتر شماره ۱ خاموش شده است. 🔥 یکی از کارکنان مقابل درِ مشعل هیتر شماره ۱ قرار می‌گیرد و از همکار خود می‌خواهد دکمه برقی شمعک هیتر را فشار دهد تا مشعل مجدداً روشن شود.

7 Aug 2026, 16:28 UTC55 viewsread 8 August 2026
Photo

🔷 #ماموریت_های_PRPLC | 🎤 برگزاری رویدادهای علمی و تخصصی در صنعت، بسیاری از مسائل زمانی بهتر دیده و حل می‌شوند که تجربه عملی، دانش تخصصی و دیدگاه‌های مختلف در کنار یکدیگر قرار بگیرند. ایجاد چنین فضایی، یکی از نیازهای جدی برای توسعه دانش و تصمیم‌گیری در حوزه‌های تخصصی است. رویداد علمی زمانی ارزشمند است که بعد از پایان برنامه، چیزی بیش از چند سخنرانی و چند عکس باقی بماند؛ مسئله‌ای روشن‌تر شده باشد، تجربه‌ای منتقل شده

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @PRPLC_PUT. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Polls

The 5 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

6 Aug 2026, 12:44 UTCAnonymous Quiz11 voters

سوال (۵)

  1. الف) ضعف اصلی در «مدیریت شرایط اضطراری» است، زیرا برنامه واکنش اضطراری باید پیش از پارگی اجرا می‌شد.18%
  2. ب) ضعف اصلی در «بازبینی مدیریت و بهبود مستمر» است. اطلاعات فنی به تصمیم و اقدام اصلاحی تبدیل نشده.64%
  3. ج) ضعف در «یکپارچگی دارایی و قابلیت اطمینان» است، زیرا بازرسی نتوانسته تمام عیوب را شناسایی کند.9%
  4. د) ضعف در «شناسایی مخاطرات و تجزیه‌وتحلیل ریسک» بوده است، زیرا انجام HIRA دیگر ضرورتی نداشته است.9%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

6 Aug 2026, 11:46 UTCAnonymous Quiz15 voters

سوال(۴)

  1. الف) احتمال تشکیل ابر بخار کاهش یافته و در نتیجه احتمال وقوع VCE نیز کمتر می‌شد33%
  2. ب) احتمال وقوع Jet Fire افزایش می‌یافت، زیرا اختلاط بیشتر هوا باعث احتراق سریع‌تر گاز می‌شود.33%
  3. ج) سرعت خروج گاز از محل پارگی کاهش می‌یافت و جرم گاز آزادشده کمتر می‌شد.20%
  4. د) احتمال پارگی ثانویه خط لوله به دلیل تغییر شرایط جوی افزایش می‌یافت.13%

Shares as published, totalling 99%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

6 Aug 2026, 11:13 UTCAnonymous Quiz13 voters

سوال(۳)

  1. الف) جنس پیگ مورد استفاده در بازرسی.23%
  2. ب) احتمال خرابی و پیامدهای متفاوت ناشی از شکست هر ناحیه.62%
  3. ج) تعداد دفعات انجام حفاظت کاتدی.15%
  4. د) زمان انجام آخرین مانور شرایط اضطراری.0%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

6 Aug 2026, 11:04 UTCAnonymous Quiz14 voters

سوال (۲)

  1. الف) احتمال تشکیل ابر بخار قابل اشتعال کاهش یافته و در نتیجه شدت VCE نیز کمتر می‌شود..14%
  2. ب) احتمال وقوع VCE کاهش می‌یابد، اما در صورت تشکیل ابر بخار، شدت انفجار مستقل از عمل LBV خواهد بود.14%
  3. ج) احتمال وقوع Jet Fire کاهش می‌یابد، اما بر احتمال تشکیل ابر بخار تأثیر محسوسی ندارد.7%
  4. د) احتمال وقوع VCE و Jet Fire کاهش می‌یابد، اما اثر LBV محدود کردن مدت نشت و جرم کل گاز آزادشده است.64%

Shares as published, totalling 99%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

6 Aug 2026, 10:50 UTCAnonymous Quiz15 voters

سوال(۱)

  1. الف) حفاظت کاتدی (Cathodic Protection)7%
  2. ب) پوشش خط لوله (Pipeline Coating)33%
  3. ج) شیر قطع خودکار شکست خط (LBV)60%
  4. د) بازدارنده‌های خوردگی (Corrosion Inhibitor)0%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 6 August 2026 to 8 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 239,151 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 5 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 8 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“مرکز مدیریت ریسک، ایمنی فرآیند و کاهش خسارات دانشگاه صنعت نفت (PRPLC)” (@PRPLC_PUT), 137 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/PRPLC_PUT.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.