Paul
I would like to meet your mom (its mum here); she sounds like my sort of person.
Since we are off topic here (not really Sajit, I agree with Paul about your
question), and I have had a shitty day trying to fit an aftermarket oil
filter to my wifes 78 bonneville (triumph), I have decided to confuse things
with a pumping question:
Am hotrodding an uphill water pipeline. 4km long, about 350m rise. Consists
of pond, main lift pumps (2 X 250kW), pipeline and did 70l/s. Four years ago
I pushed it to 80l/s by adding a 75kW suction booster between the pond and
the main lift pumps. Now am going for 100l/s, above which I think it will
blow to bits. To achieve the extra flow, I am adding a 300kW booster pump
(already ordered) halfway up the hill. The pump is going up the hill in
order to keep its inlet pressure down (28 bar max, 15 bar normal running)
and to prevent overpressure on the existing lower piping and valves. Am
forced to use a mechanical seal on the booster (3 stage) because of the high
inlet pressure and thats a worry. Its cheaper to put in a couple of km of
transmission line than to upgrade the existing valves and lower pipeline.
To minimise surge and permit reduced flow operation during booster pump
outage, there will be a check valve in parallel with the pump. The booster
will be about 2km downstream of the main lift pumps. The main lift pumps are
fitted with surge anticipation and, bless me, a pressure relief valve. The
new booster/increased flow means that the main lift pumps will operate at a
lower pressure than they do now.
Have any of you guys done anything similar? Did you have any unexpected
issues? Any suggestions?
Cheers
Steve McKenzie
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Bowers [mailto:pbowers@pipingdesign.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 4:51 PM
To: <a href="/group/PipingDesign/post?postID=LP7UB3rbYAFXtcTpDqYPez4HqYBG9wSuTFw13WvQplShaOKvxQzLlIMJfm4MxMpXGrSsV4ivCs8HEVBTqYbsrzArwygGDg">PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com</a>
Subject: Re: [Man.Distr]Re: [PipingDesign] Northing
Sajit does have a point there, Chris, and I think it's a valid question especially for those that read drawings that relate to geography.
I live on the island of Montreal, and what we call "north" is actually more like west. It's all relative, but I suggest that it's important that everyone is on the same page regarding definitions. As an example, I offer a recent experience/discussion with my mother (who is not necessarily web-savvy):
Mom: OK. I've downloaded the file and it's not working.
Me: Did you make sure you also included the image file?
Mom: Yes, I'm sure, you snot-covered craphole! I did it 3 times and it's still not working!!!
Me: OK
Mom: What is this internet garbage? It sucks and it's also probably a scam!
Me: Well, you have to know wh...
Mom: Well, I'll tell you, this internet stuff is a waste of time. I also notice that you haven't defrosted your refrigerator lately. Anyway, why hasn't Bill Clinton replied to my email yet? You said this internet thing was a communications revolution, so where's my reply?
Me: Mom, when you say "download", what does that mean to you?
Mom: Well, dummy, that's when I send stuff to the internet!
Paul
> Called north, True north, plant north what not. I thought it had some
relevance to piping plot plans and/or layouts. If it did not, my apologies.
>
> Sajit
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Wright [mailto:chrisw@skypoint.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 5:23 PM
> To: ?
> Subject: [Man.Distr]Re: [PipingDesign] Northing
>
>
> >Does anyone know whether the direction shown by a compass is the magnetic
> >north or the geographic north. What is the offset angle and the direction
> >with respect to the other.
> A magnetic compass shows magnetic north, which can vary from true north
> by a little or a lot, depending on where you are with respect to the
> magnetic pole. Do a Google search on "magnetic pole." What the hell
> brought this up on a piping list?
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a> Received on Sat Oct 18 07:29:00 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 11:40:30 EST