Comparacion entre manometros de U y de B

© All Rights Reserved

14 views

Comparacion entre manometros de U y de B

© All Rights Reserved

- Spring Mass Damper Solution
- Control & Instrumentation-1
- Pressure Transducers
- Assignment 1
- data loging code
- A Level Physics
- Second Semester Year 27 28
- Using Fast Vibrations to Quench Oscillations
- JNU-MSc-2008
- Section3_9.pdf
- Mi 017450
- A New Method to Predict Vessel Capsizing in a Realistic Seaway
- Fluid Mechanics May 2012.pdf
- Accumulator
- IMENDA_B
- Paper ID13
- 2014 Ucsm Structural Dynamics 01
- A2 Differential Pressure Gauge
- manometru europe.pdf
- circuit-6

You are on page 1of 6

com

www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

with conventional U-shaped manometer

S.S. Daood a,b,*, A. Ijaz b, H.M.A. Asghar b, M. Ali b, M.A. Butt b

a

School of Process, Environmental and Materials Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom

Faculty of Engineering and Technology, University of the Punjab, Quaid-e-Azam Campus, Lahore 54590, Pakistan

Received 1 June 2007; received in revised form 3 December 2007; accepted 15 January 2008

Available online 26 January 2008

Abstract

In continuation of mass ow rate and error analysis comparison, a dierent comparative performance study is made

between concentric tube bulb manometer (CTB) and U-shaped manometer using stability response equations. Basic

response equation of transfer function would hold for both the devices since the same underlying principle of force balance

existed. Whilst variation in stability response was evaluated in terms of deviation form of dierential height for dierent

lengths of same amount of sensing uid. This included a step change forcing function of 20 kPa at a constant value of gain.

On the basis of smaller characteristic time constant it was concluded that CTB is stable and more prompt in response as

compared to U-shaped manometer. Response curves for both the manometers were plotted with the help of MATLAB.

2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Concentric tube bulb manometer; Response equation; Sensing uid; Gain; Forcing function; Characteristic time constant;

MATLAB

1. Introduction

Regardless of oldest invention, manometer still

nds its vast application in both commercial and

industrial sectors due to accuracy and simplicity of

operation. Basis of its simplicity involves balancing

of pressure forces against the weight of uid column. Dierent types of manometers have been

designed according to the need of processes and

their suitability specic to operations. Each type

has its own utilization and advantage; however, gen-

E-mail address: pmssd@leeds.ac.uk (S.S. Daood).

ends.

A lot of studies have been carried out on dierent

manometers with reference to their accuracy, reliability and suitability for a particular use. However,

some of the studies included are; Lewicki [1] vapour

pressure measurement (VPM) of water exerted by a

food sample, automatic measurement of soilwater

pressure using reliable pressure transducer by

Thony and Vachaud [2] and measurement of carotid

artery back pressure in medical eld carried out by

Archi [3].

Other contributions involve work done by Acerbi

et al. [4] who described the characteristics of a

manometer for absolute pressure measurements of

0263-2241/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2008.01.005

935

Nomenclature

a

A

D

FP

Ff

Fg

g

h

h

L

m

DP

0

DP

h0t

dt

s2

cross-sectional area of the tube, m2

internal diameter of the tube, m

displacement pressure force, N

frictional force for the laminar ow, N

gravitational restoring force, N

gravitational acceleration, m

s2

variation of the height of the liquid column in one leg of the manometer, m

variation of height of the liquid column

in deviation form, m

total length of the liquid column in the

tube, m

mass of liquid in the tube, kg

dierence of pressures supplied to both

legs of the manometer, Pa

step change in pressure supplied to both

legs of the manometer in deviation form,

Pa

variation of the height of the liquid column in time domain deviation form, m

time during which volumetric ow rate

occurred, s

gases in open vessels and under steady ow conditions. Results included analysis of the manometer

performance with an error in measurement of

1.2% in the pressure range between 103 and

102 torr. Model development along with study of

response of capacitance manometers was done by

Poulter et al. [5]. The determination of enthalpies

of sublimation by means of thermal conductivity

manometers was done by Kruif et al. [6]; who investigated the suitability of thermal conductivity

manometers operated according to Engelsman

method for the determination of enthalpies of sublimation of low volatility substances. They used the

known vapour pressure temperature relation of

mercury to determine the characteristics of the

manometers.

Yesilata et al. [7] examined the eect of high viscosity on the response time of manometers and

transducers and established their feasibility for

dynamic pressure measurement. Ransom [8] studied

on frictionless oscillating manometer involving Utube manometer which resulted in undamped oscillations of a given frequency. Suresan and Jayanti [9]

q

g

s

f

Kp

kg

of gas above liquid is negligible), m

3

dynamic viscosity of the liquid in the

tube, Pa s

characteristic time of the system, s

damping factor, dimensionless value

steady-state, or static, or simply gain of

2 2

the system, mkgs

Function h0t = paper (s, Kp, f);

t=[0:1:10];

d=t/s;

A=cosh (sqrt (f^2-1) d);

B=(f/ sqrt (f^2-1))sinh (sqrt (f^2-1)d);

C=exp(-fd)(A+B);

x=(sqrt (1-f^2))/s;

/=atan (sqrt (1-f^2)/f);

F=(1/sqrt (1-f^2))exp (-fd)sin (xt+/);

0

% h0t = DP (Kp(1-(exp (-d)(1+d)))); % for f=1

0

0

% ht = DP (Kp(1-C)); % for f>1;

0

0

% ht = DP (Kp(1-F)); % for f<1;

Subplot (1, 2, 2); plot (t, h0t );End

the time period of oscillations and damping characteristics in case of oscillating manometer with variable density.

Above mentioned studies to some extend were

dependant upon the response behavior of the

manometer. Generally dierent manometers have

various responses and mainly this diversity is due

to their dierent shapes, constructions and operating conditions. Each of unique design or shape

has its own limitation or disadvantage, like in most

of manometers if there is a sudden increase in the

ow of uid; the manometer uid travels out in

manometer tubing and mixes with owing uid.

Some times mercury is used as sensing uid and if

its spillage occurs causes hazardous problems. Additionally in some types, pressure uctuations during

uid ow may cause erroneous evaluation of results.

Thus, a need to overcome above diculties is

resolved with CTB manometer. In this paper

response behavior of CTB manometer in comparison to the conventional U-shaped manometer is

presented.

936

The design of CTB manometer previously presented by Daood et al. [10] is inspired by two reservoir manometer which itself occupy more of space

like U-shaped manometer. However, CTB manometer shown in Fig. 1 comprises of two spherical glass

bulbs A, B of 20.6 cm3 and 7.24 cm3 volume, respectively. Total length of CTB is 305 mm; outer diameter of outer and inner tubes is 14 mm and 7 mm,

respectively with 1 mm wall thickness of whole construction. Such wall thickness is optimized after

analysis of capillary eects for various wall thicknesses. However this is trivial with respect to changing diameters and lengths of CTB. Extension X, Y

from sphere B and A, respectively is used as pressure tapings. Basic construction benets include

dampening down of mass ow changeover eects,

inhibiting spillage or carryover of sensing uid

and prompt stable response during operation.

as shown in Fig. 1; two liquid levels will be same.

After applying a pressure dierence DP on the two

legs of the manometer, the dynamic response of

sensing uid levels can be calculated by applying

force balance on the manometer [11].

ma F P F g F f ;

d2 h

32ALg dh

ALq 2 DPA 2qghA

dt

D2 dt

2

L d h 16Lg dh

1

h DP

2g dt2 qgD2 dt

2qg

16Lg

1

Using s2 2gL ; 2fs qgD

2 ; K p 2qg. Taking variables

in deviation form

s2

d2 h0

dh0

h0 K p DP 0 :

2fs

2

dt

dt

h0 s

K p DP 0

ss2 s2 2fss 1

U-shaped manometer, Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively

are obtained;

h0 s

h0 s

K p DP 0

s0:00367s2 0:1212fs 1

K p DP 0

0:234fs 1

s0:0137s2

3

4

Laplace transform of Eq. (2) becomes:

h

s t t=s i

h0 t DP 0 K p 1

e

5

s

At f < 1, response is under damped, the inverse Laplace transform of Eq. (2) becomes

"

#

tf

1

0

0

h t DP K p 1 p2 e s sinxt /

6

1f

Radian

frequency

of

p2

p2

1f rad

1f

; s ; / tan1

s

f

oscillations:

Laplace transform of Eq. (2) becomes

Fig. 1. Concentric tube bulb manometer.

"

q

t

h t DP K p 1 e

cosh f2 1

s

q !#

f

t

sinh f2 1

p

2

s

f 1

0

937

0

tf

s

The performance curves for critical, over and

under damped responses of the CTB manometer

in comparison with U-shaped manometer are plotted in Figs. 24. These curves are obtained by using

Eqs. (5)(7). The values of characteristic times of

the system for U-shaped and CTB manometers

obtained are 0.117 s and 0.0606 s, respectively.

The value of gain, Kp (0.07534 m2 s2)/kg for both

the systems is independent of the total length of

function pressure of the manometer is taken as

20 kPa.

Fig. 2 shows that CTB manometer attained its

steady mercury level in deviation form in less than

0.5 s, whereas the U-shaped manometer attained

the same in 0.9 s for critically damped response.

Thus CTB manometer results in 44% reduction in

time in comparison to U-shaped manometer.

Fig. 3 shows that time required to reach steady state

value of mercury level in deviation form is 3.5 s for

CTB manometer as compared to 5.5 s for U-shaped

manometer. Thus again CTB manometer showed

36% and 40% reduction in time compared to

U-shaped manometer for damping factors (f) of

0.1 and 0.2, respectively.

For over damped responses shown in Fig. 4, the

percentage reduction in time for CTB manometer in

Fig. 2. Comparison of critically damped response curves of both U-shaped and CTB manometer.

Fig. 3. Comparison of under damped response curves of both U-shaped and CTB manometer.

938

Fig. 4. Comparison of over damped response curves of both U-shaped and CTB manometer.

both damping factors (f) of 2 and 4.

Obtained response curves clearly indicated that

the sensing uid level (in deviation form) attained

steady-state quickly for CTB manometer compared

to U-shaped manometer. This characteristic feature

of the CTB manometer makes it more stable in operation in comparison with U-shaped manometer.

This fact is also endorsed that for constant value

of gain, response curves are totally dependent on

characteristic times and damping factors of both

the manometers. However, for critical, under

damped and over damped values of f; steady-state

is attained quickly for CTB compared to U-shaped

manometer because it has less value of characteristic

time. These values of characteristic times are dierent due to dierent lengths of sensing uid column

having same volumetric quantity. Also the spherical

reservoirs of CTB manometer provide a cushion to

dampen down the oscillations during uid ow

changeovers.

5. Conclusions

The present stability analysis study of CTB

manometer is an extension of previous work of mass

ow error comparison done by Daood et al. [10].

Performance comparison curves of both CTB

and U-shaped manometers were obtained using

derived stability response equations. The values of

characteristic time of the system for CTB and

U-shaped manometers were 0.0606 s and 0.117 s,

respectively. Value of gain for both CTB and

m2 s2/kg with a step change in input pressure dierence of 20 kPa.

On the basis of the response curves it was

concluded that CTB manometer attained stability

quicker than that of U-shaped manometer.

Response curves for critically damped, over damped

and under damped conditions were plotted and demonstrated that the time required to reach steady-state

in case of CTB manometer was less compared to

U-shaped manometer. Percentage reductions in time

to attain steady-state for critically damped is 44%

and under damped, over damped responses are

3640%. The decrease in time to attain steady-state

is related to lower value of characteristic time of

CTB in comparison to U-shaped manometer.

References

[1] P.P. Lewicki, Design of water vapour pressure manometer, J.

Food Eng. 6 (6) (1987) 405422.

[2] J.L. Thony, G. Vachaud, Automatic measurement of soil

water pressure using a capacitance manometer, J. Hydrol. 46

(12) (1980) 189196.

[3] Joseph P. Archi, A simple accurate manometer technique for

measuring carotid artery back pressure, Am. J. Surg. 136 (5)

(1978) 643644.

[4] E. Acerbi, M. Castiglioni, G. Dutto, G. Fait, F. Resmini, C.

Succi, An absolute manometer for gas pressures in the range

of 103102 torr, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. 85 (1) (1970)

4548.

[5] K.F. Poulter, M.J. Rodgers, P.J. Nash, T.J. Thompson,

M.P. Perkin, Thermal transpiration correction in capacitance manometers, Vacuum 33 (6) (1983) 311316.

[6] C.G. De Kruif, H.A.J. Oonk, The determination of enthalpies of sublimation by means of thermal conductivity

manometers, Chemie Ingenieur Technik CIT 45 (7) (1973)

455461.

[7] B. Yesilata, A. Oztekin, S. Neti, J. Kazakia, Pressure

measurements in highly viscous and elastic uids, J. Fluids

Eng. 122 (3) (2000) 626633.

[8] V. Ransom, Oscillating manometer, in: G.F. Hewitt, J.M.

Delhaye, N. Zuber (Eds.), Multiphase Science and

Technology, vol. 6, vch, New York, USA, 1992, pp. 591

609.

939

with variable density and dissipation: experimental and

numerical study, Nucl. Eng. Design 229 (2004) 5973.

[10] S.S. Daood, A. Ijaz, M.A. Butt, Design of CTB manometer

and its performance compared to U-shaped manometer,

I.C.E.T, I.R 284 (2006).

[11] G. Stephanopoulos, Chemical Process Control; An Introduction to Theory and Practice, seventh ed., Prentice Hall

Publishers, 2005, International Edition.

- Spring Mass Damper SolutionUploaded byasbadg
- Control & Instrumentation-1Uploaded byAshish Vashisth
- Pressure TransducersUploaded byMahmoud Ashraf
- Assignment 1Uploaded byChristopher Laurico
- data loging codeUploaded byapi-448542156
- A Level PhysicsUploaded byvinuye
- Second Semester Year 27 28Uploaded byOmar Fathy
- Using Fast Vibrations to Quench OscillationsUploaded byluizomar
- JNU-MSc-2008Uploaded bysairajdream
- Section3_9.pdfUploaded byYafi Al Hadi
- Mi 017450Uploaded byartmsb
- A New Method to Predict Vessel Capsizing in a Realistic SeawayUploaded byalejo
- Fluid Mechanics May 2012.pdfUploaded byDax Shukla
- AccumulatorUploaded bySyaf Huda
- IMENDA_BUploaded byShahbaz Ahmad
- Paper ID13Uploaded bynguyendattdh
- 2014 Ucsm Structural Dynamics 01Uploaded byFernando Meza Duman
- A2 Differential Pressure GaugeUploaded byAbdulJabbarSethar
- manometru europe.pdfUploaded byAnonymous 4MwmDaNb
- circuit-6Uploaded byRahul Singh
- Saso Bs en 837-2-2016-e(للتوزيع (1)Uploaded byMimi Miranti
- Lina W1-W2-Fundamentals of Vibrations-Lina EditedUploaded byNurul Qurratu
- Theory AssignmentUploaded byfahadfadi48
- Development of the Passive Negative Stiffness Damper for Reducing Absolute Responses of RAILWAY StructuresUploaded bycontrerasc_sebastian988
- Question RevisionUploaded byPawan Kumar Aggarwal
- 490a_datasheetUploaded byfachjrian
- metodo B hi-volUploaded byJuan Poveda
- Multiple-choice questions on pressure in fluidsUploaded byrenv
- Mathematics Part IA Paper 2 2008.psUploaded byjai ramanathan
- Fluid-Mechanics-Turbomachinery_GATE-2020.pdfUploaded byRavi khakhkhar

- FAQ About HardfacingUploaded byMohamed Ibrahim Mohamedi
- 1261483449_2731__6Uploaded byAlex Kascut
- a2-41b-circularmotionUploaded byHany ElGezawy
- ZF5HP24Uploaded byStalix
- Design Specs for Rewiring a Catalina 34 SailboatUploaded byJeremy Rosenblatt
- PropellersUploaded byWilliam_Bitter
- nts question latestUploaded byZafar Islam Zafar
- Condensation Control in Glazed Flat CollectorsUploaded byJorge Vaz
- Press OlUploaded byemmeline_leda
- 24B-Pactical Pipe Inspection 2006Uploaded byKhalid Perwez
- Mechanical Behaviour Research of Long Span Prestressed Steel–Concrete Composite BeamUploaded bymutaztaha
- Diffusion- Aloke PaulUploaded byAbc
- Air release valveUploaded byPipeline Engineer
- Classified_2014_12_21_000000Uploaded bysasikala
- Check Allowable Capacity T-11 with SPT.xlsUploaded byArdhie Aja
- MotorsUploaded byJohn Reantaso
- Ingersoll Rand EPE,XFE, HPE, HXPE Series Parts List - Recommended Spares (March 2000)Uploaded byJonathan FuckYouScribd
- Lab 7 FreefallUploaded byAnonymous LGB1O2fA
- Alfa 164 Electronic Suspension Rebuild ManualUploaded byJavier0043
- Special RelativityUploaded bypticicaaa
- Welding Technology & Inspection Method.pptUploaded byVivek Satapathy
- Theory_Cross_Section_Characteristics_enu.pdfUploaded byMarko Šimić
- AccomplishmentUploaded byMarvelyn Maneclang Catubag
- Manitou MT 14 18 (EN)Uploaded byManitou
- IJETR031868Uploaded byerpublication
- College of Engineering 2Uploaded byalex
- Automotive Y4Uploaded byJayzel Joy Bautista Juanico
- A-931Uploaded byJosé Ramón Gutierrez
- Enclosure Cooling DesignUploaded byrajpre1213
- Assignment in StrengthUploaded byKayerzzz

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.