Deboosters are used to knock high hydrostatic pressures down to a reasonable value. Ours are 4:1 and are used for instrument readings and to keep high pressures out of the cabin. I don't think they are peculiar to the oilfield but my experience is limited. I have deboosters on some of my hydraulic, wellhead pressure and Cryo-Nitrogen circuits.

The hydraulic proportioning valves, various pressure control valves and my P12 pumps are remotely controlled by an array of pressure control valves and needle valves depending upon their purpose. It's not my design, I just take it as it was built. If electrically controlled hydraulic valves are as reliable as their remotely piloted brethren (subject of thread) I'm in the clear.

My cryo Nitrogen circuits are designed with pneumatic valves. It's been somewhat of an annoyance on my system diagrams reconciling nomenclature, reference designators and symbols for pneumatic, hydraulic and electronic components - but that's another forum.

Mike H's comments are taken seriously. Operator acceptance is proving to be my biggest resistance so far. Some of the other companies have built rigs with electronic controls with varying rates of success. I've somewhat mollified the operators with assurances that there is no computer involved in the control loop (yet) and automation is not a goal. There will always be an operator in the loop.

MORE NEWS