|
|
Enron Mail |
Jim,
Thanks for response. I'll probably have a few more questions once I digest all the info that you provided. Regards, Darrell Jim Tucker 11/22/2000 08:34 AM To: Darrell Stovall/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jack Boatman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, John Hodge/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Parker/FGT/Enron@ENRON Subject: Sta. 20 Suction Pressures Excuse me, thats 97.8% of the days that were greater than 516 psig. ---------------------- Forwarded by Jim Tucker/FGT/Enron on 11/22/2000 08:34 AM --------------------------- Jim Tucker 11/22/2000 08:29 AM To: Darrell Stovall/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jack Boatman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, John Hodge/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Parker/FGT/Enron@ENRON Subject: Sta. 20 Suction Pressures Darrell, Attached is a history (last 365 days) of the suction pressures of Station 20 arranged in descending order. In a nutshell, we looked at the minimum pressure (492 psig), calculated the pressure drop (34# at 54.4 MMcf/d) on the proposed 6.6 miles of 12" to get 458 psig at the upstream side of the regulator. Typically we would like to have a 50# differental across the regulator, which would give us 408 psig downstream of regulation. I believe you were needing 435 psig. Looking at the it in reverse, 435 psig + 50 psig across reg = 485 psig, calculate pressure drop (31 psig), we would need 516 psig at the suction of Station 20. Note there are only 8 days during the last year where the pressure was lower than 516 psig or 97.8% of the time. Please call me if you would like to discuss further or would like to meet. Jim Tucker X5-3455
|