Api MPSM Cap 5 Sec 6

[Type text]
Manual of Petroleum
Measurement Standards
Chapter 5—Metering
Section 6—Measurement of Liquid
Hydrocarbons by Coriolis Meters
WG BALLOT DRAFT 5_6_2016
This document is not an API Standard; it is under consideration within an API technical
committee but has not received all approvals required to become an API Standard. It shall
not be reproduced or circulated or quoted, in whole or in part, outside of API committee
activities except with the approval of the Chairman of the committee having jurisdiction
and staff of the API Standards Dept. Copyright API. All rights reserved.
2 CHAPTER 5—METERING
Manual of Petroleum
Measurement Standards
Section 6—Measurement of Liquid

Hydrocarbons by Coriolis Meters
Measurement Coordination
SECOND EDITION, MONTH 2016

SECTION 6—MEASUREMENT OF LIQUID HYDROCARBONS BY CORIOLIS METERS 3
FOREWORD
This standard may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This
standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems associated with its use. It
is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health
practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
API publications may be used by anyone desiring to do so. Every effort has been made by
the Institute to assure the accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however,
the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this
publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or
damage resulting from its use or for the violation of any federal, state, or municipal reg-
ulation with which this publication may conflict.
Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to Measurement Coordination,
American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.
Introduction
This standard is intended to describe methods to achieve custody transfer levels of ac-
curacy when a Coriolis meter is used to measure liquid hydrocarbons.
Coriolis meters measure mass flow rate and density. It is recognized that meters other
than the types described in this document are used to meter liquid hydrocarbons. This
publication does not endorse or advocate the preferential use of a Coriolis meter nor does
it intend to restrict the development of other types of meters. Those who use other types
of meters may find sections of this publication useful.
Field of Application
The field of application of this document is any division of the petroleum industry where
dynamic flow measurement of applicable fluids is desired. The use of Coriolis meters for
alternate applications or fluids may be addressed within other chapters of the API MPMS
and are not precluded by this standard.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 6—Measurement of Liquid Hydrocarbons by Coriolis Meters
1 SCOPE
This standard is intended to be a guide for the specification, installation, verification and
operation of Coriolis meters used to dynamically measure liquid hydrocarbons so that
acceptable accuracy, service life, safety, reliability, and quality control can be
achieved. API MPMS Chapter 5.6 also includes information that will assist in trouble-
shooting and improving the performance of the meters.
Use of a Coriolis meter as a stand-alone density meter is not addressed by the standard.
2 NORMATIVE REFERENCES
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this docu-
ment. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the
latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 1, Vocabulary
API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter Ch. 12.2, Calculation of

Petroleum Quantities Using Dynamic Measurement Methods
3 TERMS, DEFINITIONS, AND SYMBOLS
3.1 Terms and Definitions
For the purpose of this document, the following definitions apply. Refer to API Manual of
Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS) Chapter 1 for the definition of additional
terms used in this standard.
3.1.1
calibration
The process of utilizing a reference standard to determine a coefficient which adjusts the
output of the Coriolis transmitter to bring it to a value which is within the specified accu-
racy tolerance of the meter over a specified flow range. This process is normally con-
ducted by the manufacturer.
3.1.2
cavitation
Phenomenon related to and following flashing if the pressure recovers and the vapor
bubbles collapse (implode).
3.1.3
mass
M
The Indicated Mass corrected with an applied Meter Factor. M = IM × MF
3.1.4
Coriolis meter
Coriolis mass meter
Coriolis force flowmeter
A Coriolis meter is a device which by means of the interaction between a flowing fluid and
the oscillation of a tube(s), measures mass flow rate and density. The meter consists of a
flow sensor and a Coriolis transmitter.
3.1.5
Coriolis meter factor, mass or volume
MF, MFm, MFv
A dimensionless number obtained by dividing the actual quantity of fluid passed through
the meter (as determined by proving), by the quantity registered by the meter. For sub-
sequent metering operations, the actual quantity is determined by multiplying the indi-
cated quantity by the meter factor.
3.1.6
Coriolis transmitter
The electronics associated with a Coriolis meter which interprets the phase shift signal
from the flow sensor, converts it to a meaningful mass flow rate (represented in engi-
neering units), and generates an output signal representing mass flow rate and/or quan-
tity. Most manufacturers also use it to drive the sensor tubes, determine fluid density, and
calculate and output a volumetric flow rate.
3.1.7
flow sensor
A mechanical assembly consisting of: housing: the means of providing environmental
protection. This may or may not provide secondary containment. measurement sensor
(s): Sensors to monitor oscillations and to detect the effect of Coriolis forces. These are
also referred to as pickups or pickoffs. support structure: A means for supporting the vi-
brating conduit. vibrating conduit: Oscillating tube (s) or channel through which the fluid to
be measured flows. vibrating drive system: The means for inducing the oscillation of the
vibrating tube.
3.1.8
indicated mass
IM
The registered mass quantity without corrections, i.e. closing reading minus opening
reading. IM = (pulses or counts) / K-factor.
3.1.9
manufacturer density calibration factor
A numerical factor which may or may not be used to address density sensitivity of each
individual Coriolis meter flow sensor. It is unique to each sensor and derived during
sensor calibration. When programmed into the transmitter, the density calibration fac-
tor(s) helps ensure that the meter performs to its stated specifications.
NOTE The Manufacturer Density Calibration Factor should not be confused with
Density Meter Factor (DMF).
3.1.10
manufacturer flow calibration factor
A numerical factor which may or may not be used to address flow sensitivity of each in-
dividual Coriolis meter flow sensor. It is unique to each sensor and derived during sensor
calibration. When programmed into the Coriolis transmitter, the flow calibration factor(s)
helps ensure that the meter performs to its stated specifications.
NOTE The Manufacturer Flow Calibration Factor should not be confused with K-factor
or Meter Factor (MF).
3.1.11
meter assembly
The flow sensor and Coriolis transmitter used for the measurement of fluid.
3.1.12
net mass
NM
The Mass (M) of the fluid without Sediment and Water (S&W). NM = CM × CSW
3.1.13
pressure loss
pressure drop
The difference between upstream and downstream pressures due to the frictional and
inertial losses associated with fluid motion in the entrance, exit, and internal passages of
the flowmeter or other specified systems and equipment.
3.1.14
sediment and water mass
SWM
The mass of Sediment and Water (S&W). SWM = CM – NM
3.1.15
zeroing
A procedure that sets the stored zero value.
NOTE The zeroing operation should not be confused with resetting the totalizer.
3.1.16
zero offset, observed
The difference between the current observed zero value and the previous observed zero
value.
3.1.17
zero stability
The variability of the observed zero value during the process of determining the value.
NOTE This is a systematic uncertainty, which can be present over the working range
of the meter.
3.1.18
zero value, observed
The average mass or volume flow rate observed reading under zero (no) flow conditions,
without inhibited flow indications (i.e., low-flow cutoff disabled and bidirectional flow en-
abled).
3.1.19
zero error
The observed zero value expressed as a percentage of normal flow rate.
3.1.20
zero value, stored
The value within the transmitter representing a no flow condition.
3.1.21
zero verification
The process of determining if the observed zero value is within the operator’s zero error
limit (a tolerance).
3.1.22
zero value, as-found
The observed zero value before a meter is zeroed.

3.1.23
zero value, as-left
The observed zero value after a meter has been zeroed.
3.2 Acronyms and Symbols (waiting on calculations group likely to be placed in

Annex)
Acronyms and symbols used within the document are listed below: (following left in as a
place holder for any required entries)
CPLm = correction for pressure effect on fluid at the Coriolis meter
CPLp = correction for pressure effect on fluid at the prover
CPSp = correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover
CTLm = correction for thermal expansion of fluid at the Coriolis meter
CTLp = correction for thermal expansion of fluid at the prover
CTSp = correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover
IMm = indicated Coriolis meter mass
IVm = indicated Coriolis meter volume
KFm = K-factor in units of pulses per unit mass
KFv = K-factor in units of pulses per unit volume
MFm = meter factor when the Coriolis meter is configured to indicate mass
MFv = meter factor when the Coriolis meter is configured to indicate volume
4 GENREAL
A Coriolis meter consists of a flow sensor and a Coriolis transmitter. A flow sensor has
one or more tubes through which the fluid flows. The tube or tubes are made to vibrate at
their natural or harmonic frequencies by means of an electromagnetic driving mecha-
nism. The flowing fluid generates a Coriolis force that is directly proportional to the mass
flow rate of the fluid. The magnitude of the Coriolis force can be detected and converted to
a mass flow rate. The transmitter powers the sensor, processes the output from the
sensor in response to mass flow, and generates signals for the tertiary device(s). Refer to
Annex D for factory calibration.
A Coriolis meter can indicate density. In this case, the frequency of the oscillating tube or
tubes is measured and used to determine the density of the fluid. The density is deter-
mined independent of the mass flow rate determination. Refer to Annex D for factory
calibration.
The volumetric flow rate is determined by dividing the mass flow rate by the measured
density at flowing conditions.
5 APPLICATION
5.1 Flow Sensor Considerations
The flow sensor directly measures mass flow rate and density. Therefore, the volumetric
flow rate is calculated from these two measurements. Flow sensors need to be selected
to measure these parameters over the full operating range. Consider the effect of the
following issues on the flow sensor to ensure it meets all requirements.
5.2 Flow Sensor Tube Design
Flow sensors often restrict the cross-sectional flow area resulting in higher fluid velocity
and pressure drop than experienced in the associated piping. The pressure drop depends
on the sensor design along with the viscosity and density of the fluid and the desired flow
rate. Consult the flow sensor manufacturer for appropriate methods to calculate velocity
and pressure drop through the sensor.
Higher fluid velocities, when coupled with abrasive particles in the stream, may cause
tube erosion and measurement error. Select the flow sensor to provide required accuracy
within the allowable system pressure drop constraints while avoiding erosion.
Avoid cavitation or flashing in the meter and the prover. Cavitation, in the meter, will
cause a measurement error and can damage the sensor. Equation C-1 in Annex C pro-
vides a guideline to maintain sufficient pressure downstream of the meter and the prover
connection.
The provision for adequate draining, vapor elimination, and cleaning ability should be
considered based upon the fluid characteristics and sensor design. Sensors should be
installed to avoid trapping any vapors.
Different tube geometry may be more or less likely to promote the accumulation of
sediments or coatings within the tubes. Besides restricting flow, the accumulation of
material within the tube is likely to affect the observed zero and/or the accuracy of the
density and volume measurements. Tube material compatibility for operating conditions
and fluid properties including corrosiveness and abrasiveness
5.2.1 Accuracy
Various Coriolis sensors have different accuracy specifications. Each design and size
could have different sensitivity to flow rate and density changes, and to the influence of
operating pressure, temperature and ambient temperature.
Consult the manufacturer for the performance envelope describing error limits throughout
the flow rate range and operating pressure range and consider these limits with respect to
the system requirements. The meter factor variation increases as the flow rate ap-
proaches zero flow due to the zero offset and zero stability. See Figure 1 and 2.
Pressure and temperature of the sensor affects the accuracy of the measurement of
mass, volume and density. These effects are size and design dependent.
Temperature effects on the tubes shall be compensated.
Pressure compensation is recommended. The decision to pressure compensate for tube

stiffness depends upon:
 meter size, geometry, and tube material
 variations in operating pressure
 variations between the operating pressure and the pressure at the time of
proving
 meter proving location (when not proving the meter in-situ)
Pressure compensation for tube stiffness in a sensor can be accomplished by activating
the pressure compensation mode in the transmitter and:
 using a live pressure input to the transmitter to continuously adjust for
pressure changes affecting the measurement value (preferred method), or
 entering a fixed pressure value into the transmitter which is only allowed
when the meter is proved ex-situ and if the meter factor calculations doc-
ument the tube stiffness pressure correction for the average operating
pressure. See Annex F.
Flow sensor measurement performance can be impaired by external piping loads, vibra-
tion, and pulsation.
The observed zero offset is a measurement bias, primarily affecting the lower flow rate
range of the meter.
5.2.2 Pressure Rating

Sensor tubes and end connections shall meet the pressure code requirement for the
service. The external housing may or may not meet the pressure code requirement for the
service.
Figure 1–Typical Meter Factor Linearity

Figure 2 –Typical Run Repeatability Variation

5.2.3 Documentation
Meter manufacturers provide calibration certificates. Other documentation for the flow
meter such as electrical area classification certification, hydrostatic test report, material
test reports can be provided.
5.2.4 Bidirectional Flow
These flowmeters are capable of bidirectional flow. If bidirectional flow is required, ensure
that the transmitter and the flow computer are both capable of bidirectional flow. If the
meter is used to measure bidirectional flow, a meter factor shall be developed for each
direction.
5.2.5 Sensor Options
Additional or optional sensor features can be provided by the meter manufacturer to
reduce the effect of tube failure. Items to consider:
 Flow sensor housings constructed as a pressure-containing vessel, designed

to contain fluid under pressure to a specified pressure limit.
 Rupture disks, pressure relief valves and drains, or vents on the housing, to
relieve pressure inside the housing and allow fluids released due to a tube
fracture to be directed away from the flow sensor to an area less hazardous to
operating/maintenance personnel.
5.2.6 Mounting
Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations for the proper mounting of the flow sensor.
Consideration should be given to the support of the sensor, the alignment of the inlet and
outlet flanges with the sensor, and the orientation of the sensor (vertical or horizontal,
upward or downward).
Piping should be anchored to avoid transferring any stresses from the piping to the flow
sensor. Piping vibration and fluid pulsation can affect the ability of the sensor to accu-
rately measure as the external vibration or pulsation approaches the resonant frequency
of the sensor. Consult the manufacturer for vibration or pulsation frequencies to be
avoided. Pulsation dampeners may be required in some situations.
Meter performance, specifically observed zero offset, can be adversely affected by axial
bending and torsional stresses from pressure, weight, and thermal effects; these stresses
and associated loads can be minimized by utilizing properly aligned pipe work and
well-designed supports. A spool piece, equal in length to the meter, should be used in
place of the meter to align pipework during the construction phase.
Solids settlement, plugging, coating, or trapped gas can affect the meter performance.
Flow sensor orientation depends on the application and the geometry of the oscillating
tube(s) and should be recommended by the manufacturer.
With multiple flow sensors in close proximity, either in parallel or series, the vibrations
generated by each sensor could interfere with each other, thereby causing measurement
error. This issue is called crosstalk. Vibration isolation or dampening can be achieved by
altering piping, and/or supports. Consult the manufacturer prior to installation to reduce
the possibility of crosstalk.
5.3 Transmitter Considerations
5.3.1 Environmental
Evaluate the temperature, humidity and corrosion extremes at the installation for appro-
priate protection.
5.3.2 Electrical
Select the transmitter and flow sensor to meet the required electrical area classification.
Consider the power requirements for the flow sensor and transmitter. Design the elec-
trical signal system to provide appropriate fidelity and security.
The sensor, transmitter, and their interconnecting cables are all susceptible to Electro-
magnetic Interference (EMI). Since the electrical signals of the meter are at relatively low
power levels, care shall be taken to avoid interference generated from nearby electrical
equipment and wiring. These meters employ various materials and methods to provide
shielding against EMI.
5.3.3 Operability Considerations
Mount the transmitter such that it may be easily accessed to attach communications
equipment, to view displays, and to use keypads. The meter’s pulse output signal is
normally from the transmitter not from the flow sensor. In portable proving applications,
installing the transmitter as close as practical to the prover computer location facilitates
connecting the portable prover.
Consider the operability:
 Means of configuring (keypad, hand-held tool or laptop with software)
 Local display requirement
 Ease of electrical connections
 Ease of zeroing and programing changes
 Ability to correctly totalize bidirectional flows separately
 Auditing and reporting requirements (See Section 8)
5.3.4 Input and Output Signals
Sensors do not, by the nature of their operation, have a raw pulse output representing
either mass or volume. The transmitter performs internal calculations to determine a flow
rate and generates a user defined frequency to represent that flow rate. The exact rela-
tionship between frequency and flow rate is configurable by the user, commonly ex-
pressed as a K-factor. See equation 1 below.
User defined frequency / User defined flow rate = K-factor (Equation 1)
Example:
1000 Hertz / 10 barrels/second = 100 pulses/barrel
1000 Hertz / 1000 pounds/second = 1 pulse/pound
1000 Hertz / 16.667 pounds/second = 60 pulses/pound (approximately)
Alternately, some versions of Coriolis meters allow the user to enter the K-factor directly.
When the K-factor is entered, the frequency value and flow rate value are calculated in
the transmitter.
Care shall be taken when selecting the values to ensure that the following two conditions
are satisfied:
 When the meter is flowing at maximum specified flow rate—The frequency
output by the transmitter shall not exceed 90 % of the maximum input fre-
quency of the tertiary device(s) receiving the pulse signal.
 When the meter is flowing at minimum specified flow rate—The frequency
output by the transmitter shall be high enough to produce sufficient pulses per
unit time to provide the appropriate flow rate and quantity resolution needed for
the application.
5.4 System Design Considerations
Measurement system design considerations for Coriolis meters used in custody transfer
metering are found in Annex C of this document.
6 OPERATIONS/PERFORMANCE
6.1 Meter Commissioning
6.1.1 Fill
To avoid damage to the sensor, a spool piece should be installed in place of the meter
each time new piping or fluids are introduced into the piping system that can contain
deleterious materials from construction or maintenance activities.
Avoid cavitation, flashing, and fluid hammer when filling to prevent damage to the flow
sensor. Avoid shock loading caused by rapid opening or closing of valves.
6.1.2 Initial Zero Verification
As part of the commissioning for a meter, the sensor shall be filled with the liquid to be
measured at normal operating conditions. A procedure shall be followed to verify and
record the observed zero value. In order to verify the observed zero value of the meter,
there shall be no flow through the flow sensor. See Annex A for a zero value verification
and evaluation procedure.
An improperly zeroed meter or a shift in observed zero value can result in measurement
bias. This is usually caused by variations in temperature, pressure or density, or changes
in the mounting conditions as a result of poor installation practices that put stress on the
sensor. The bias is a constant offset in flow rate. Thus, this constant offset will result in a
percent error that increases as the flow rate decreases.
The observed zero value will not normally be constant live value. Small variations are
expected and a properly zeroed meter will fluctuate between positive and negative flow
rates within the specified zero stability for the meter.
6.2 Conditions Affecting Meter Performance
Coriolis meter accuracy can be affected by conditions that change the flexibility of the
oscillating tube, as well as, fluid properties, operating conditions, and installation condi-
tions. If there are changes in those properties or operating conditions, or there is an al-
teration to the sensor installation, a change in meter factor may result.
 Flow rate variations—Flow rate can affect the density measurement because
flow rate affects the frequency of vibration. If the measured density is not
compensated for flow rate, volumetric flow measurement will be affected by
flow rate.
 Fluid temperature—Changes in fluid temperature affect the elasticity of the

oscillating tube(s). The effect of temperature is systematic and is characterized
and compensated for in the transmitter to minimize its influence on the accu-
racy of the meter. The magnitude of this effect depends on meter size, tube
material, tube geometry and amount of temperature change. Fluid temperature
changes can create stresses on piping near the meter which can change the
observed zero value.
 Fluid pressure—Changes in pressure affect the vibrational characteristics of

the sensing tubes. The effect of pressure is systematic and can be character-
ized and compensated for to minimize its influence on the accuracy of the
Coriolis meter. The magnitude of this effect depends on meter size, design, and
amount of pressure change. Pressure sensitivity tends to increase with sensor
size. The pressure effect on meter factor will be minimized by operating within a
narrow range of the proving pressure. Consult the manufacturer for the effects
of pressure on their sensor.
 Two-phase stream—Gas or air in a liquid stream is detrimental to accurate

measurement. Measurement or custody transfer applications shall be for sin-
gle-phase liquids.
 Flashing and/or cavitation within the flow sensor—Sufficient backpressure

shall be maintained on the meter and prover to prevent flashing or cavitation in
the meter (see Annex C). Tube geometries and sensor designs may create a
low pressure area within the sensor which is lower than the outlet pressure.
 Coatings or deposits within the flow sensor—Heavy or non-uniform coating can

cause a shift in flow calibration. Calibration is also affected if the density of the
coating is significantly different than the density of the flowing fluid.
 Erosion of the flow sensor—Abrasive solids can reduce the sensor tube
thickness, which in severe cases can lead to calibration shifts and tube failure.
 Corrosion of the flow sensor—Tube material compatibility with the fluid is es-
sential for reliable service.
6.2.1 Fluid Properties

To achieve the level of accuracy required for custody transfer measurement, the meter
should be proved on a similar fluid and under similar operating and installation conditions
as encountered in normal operations. Therefore, when operations change, the meter
should be proved under the new conditions as soon as practical. Additionally:
 Density—Change in the fluid density can affect meter accuracy and may re-
quire zero verification and/or proving of the meter.
 Viscosity— Change in the fluid viscosity can affect meter accuracy and may
require zero verification and/or proving of the meter. Boundary layer thickening
caused by increasing viscosity can affect meter accuracy, increase the mini-
mum flow rate or decrease the maximum flow rate. The manufacturer’s rec-
ommendation for viscosity compensation should be followed.
6.2.2 Installation Conditions
There are several considerations for installing the Coriolis meter:
 Vibration—Although the meters are designed to withstand vibration in pipeline
installations, vibration near the frequency of the sensor (or one of its harmon-
ics) can seriously affect the accuracy of the meter. The sensor should be in-
stalled as far as possible from vibration sources such as pumps, compressors,
and motors. The manufacturer can advise on vibration mitigation methods.
 Multiple flow sensor vibration interference (crosstalk)—Sensors of the same
size and model operate at similar frequencies and can transmit vibrational
energy to adjacent meters. This can cause measurement errors (see 4.2.7).
 Pulsating flow—Hydraulic pulsation near the operating frequency of the sensor
(or one of its harmonics) can also affect the accuracy of the meter. If this con-
dition exists, pulsation dampeners may be helpful.
 Mechanical stress—The sensor is susceptible to axial, radial, and torsional
stresses caused by the piping installation (see 4.2.7).
 Non-uniform velocity profile or swirl—Testing on several meter designs has
indicated that non-uniform velocity profile, including swirl, has little or no effect
on meter performance. This may not hold true for all meter designs.
 Electromagnetic and radio frequency interference—Strong magnetic fields
could affect the electromagnetic signals from the sensor. The meter sensor and
electronics shall not be installed near radio frequency or electromagnetic in-
terference sources such as variable frequency motors, transformers, radio
transmitters, large switchgear, or high voltage cables. The cable that connects
the sensor and transmitter shall not be installed near high voltage power cables
or sources of EMI and RFI noise.
 Voltage regulation—Install power line conditioning if the power to the elec-
tronics is not clean.
6.3 Considerations for zeroing
When the reproducibility of a meter factor is outside the operating company tolerances,
the observed zero value needs to be verified. See Annex A for zero verification proce-
dures. Zeroing of the meter shall not take place as part of any routine operational pro-
cedure, proving or installation, without verifying and recording the observed zero value. A
proving shall always follow the zeroing procedure.
The need for zeroing the meter will depend on the operating flow rate of the system.
When the observed zero value is very small, it has minimal effect on meter accuracy at
the maximum rated flow rate of the meter. The influence of the observed zero value
becomes more significant at lower flow rates as illustrated by the meter accuracy speci-
fication shown in Figure 1. In general, the error associated with the observed zero value
can be determined from the following equation:
q0
Err = -----  100
0
qf (Equation 2)
where
Err0 = zero error (%)
q0 = observed zero value
qf = flow rate during normal operation
If the zero error is outside the tolerance and the meter is zeroed, the meter shall be
proved after zeroing. If the meter reproducibility continues to change over time, from proof
to proof, the observed zero may be influenced for various reasons:
 Flow sensor installation conditions (e.g., upstream piping configuration, vibra-
tion, pulsation)
 Pipeline stress (e.g., as induced by ambient temperature changes or mainte-
nance on adjacent equipment)
 Changes in fluid conditions that affect the meter (temperature, pressure and
density)
6.4 Maintenance
6.4.1 Flow Sensor Repair or Replacement

Following factory repair or replacement of the flow sensor, the user shall ensure that the
correct calibration factors are entered into the transmitter to match the sensor’s unique
characteristics. The calibration factors will be provided by the manufacturer. An initial zero
verification shall be performed. See Annex A. A proving shall be accomplished after re-
installation of a repaired or replacement flow sensor.
6.4.2 Transmitter Repair or Replacement
After repair, users shall ensure that the correct calibration and K-factors are entered into
the transmitter. An initial zero verification shall be performed. Replacement of circuit
boards or the transmitter in total may affect the meter factor. A proving shall be accom-
plished after any repair or replacement of a transmitter.
7 PROVING
7.1 General
This section addresses proving issues related specifically to Coriolis meters. Detailed
requirements for operations of provers and meter factor determination requirements are
provided in API MPMS Ch. 4.8.
Coriolis meters are unique in that they may be used to indicate in either mass or volume.
A meter is calibrated by the manufacturer to determine one or more calibration factors
that are entered into the transmitter. These factors, although adjustable, should remain
unchanged. A proving shall be accomplished after any change to any calibration factors
within the transmitter.
7.2 Proving Considerations
7.2.1 Conditions
Proving conditions should be as close to the actual metering conditions as practical. See
API MPMS Ch. 4.8 for additional details.
In addition to the initial field proving, periodic provings are necessary to confirm or
re-establish the performance accuracy of the meter. Provings should be performed per
API MPMS. 4.8. Prove the meter any time the meter is zeroed or when any changes have
been made in the transmitter that impact flow indication or output.
7.2.2 Density
Density stability is critical during proving for either mass or volume outputs.
There are various ways to determine density. For proving calculations, it is important to
distinguish between flowing, observed, and base density, how each is determined, and
when and where each are be applied to a proving. Density measurements may be made
online or off-line via a representative sample. Density may be calculated from composi-
tion or published equations. API MPMS Ch. 14.6 and API MPMS Ch. 11.1 should be
referenced for more information on density determination and calculation. Density values
shall be recorded as recommended in API MPMS Ch. 12.2 and Annex B (mass calcula-
tion).
7.2.3 Temperature and Pressure
Changes in pressure and temperature will change the sensor tube stiffness and diameter
which can affect the proving results if these influences are not properly compensated in
the transmitter. See Section 5.2.2.
7.2.4 Evaluation of Meter Proving Data
 Number of Runs for a Proving

The random uncertainty of the proving results is the primary criteria for an acceptable
proving. The Coriolis meter is a computational meter and might require more runs than a
PD or Turbine meter to obtain the requisite uncertainty. See API MPMS Ch. 4.8 for ad-
ditional details.
 Contributors to Increased Random Uncertainty

The following will lead to increased random uncertainty:
o Proof duration too short
o Cavitation/void fraction in the fluid
o Noise or vibration at frequencies that affect the sensor
o Zero instability, especially at low flow rates
o Flow and/or density instability
o Excessive time delay between the measured flow and manufactured flow
pulses. (See API MPMS Ch. 4.8).
o Excessive flow velocity
o Installation issues (varying pipe stress, poor wiring)
7.2.5 Reproducibility
Meter factor reproducibility is the ability of a meter to generate results over a period of
time where the range of variation of (change in) pressure, temperature, flow rate, and
physical properties of the liquid is negligibly small. The expected reproducibility should be
determined by the operating company based on financial risk and experience with each
individual meter and proving system or upon a meter’s linearity.
For inferred mass proving, where density is to be determined at the prover, the random
uncertainty and reproducibility of the mass meter factor is affected by the flowmeter
performance, the choice of prover density determination, the density samples or readings
taken, and the density meter proving. Assessment of the mass meter factor should in-
clude evaluating the prover density uncertainty.
Determining acceptable meter factor reproducibility is an operating company responsi-
bility. When the reproducibility of a meter factor is outside the operating company toler-
ances, the meter zero needs to be verified. See Annex A for zero verification procedures.
Needless zeroing should be avoided in order to minimize potential errors associated with
meter factor reproducibility.
Industry practice is to allow a greater combined reproducibility tolerance for inferred mass
measurement systems which use volume (e.g., turbine) and density meters. The repro-
ducibility for these systems is the sum of the volume and density meter’s acceptable
meter reproducibility. Thus the two meters factors may cancel out each other or produce a
larger reproducibility tolerance (larger MF shift). This greater tolerance should be ex-
tended to Coriolis meters that are proved by inferred mass method. Common practice for
custody transfer applications is to accept new meter factors within 0.10 % to 0.50 % of the
previous meter factor. Action and tolerance limits will be defined individually by each
operating company. Guidance is provided in API MPMS Ch. 13.2.
 Reasons for Non-reproducibility

Transmitter configuration should be reviewed when unexpected variations in meter factor
occur to confirm that any value or factor (Calibration Factors, K-factor) that impacts flow
indication or output have not changed since the last prove. See Section 8
Other reasons for lack of reproducibility:
o Zero shift
o Change in operating pressure that may require compensation. See Annex F
o Choice of prover density determination for inferred mass proving and its sam-
pling frequency.
7.2.6 Scheduled Frequency of Proving
The frequency of proving is addressed by API MPMS Ch. 4.8.
7.2.7 Proving Methods
7.2.7.1 General
The methodologies used to prove a Coriolis meter are direct mass, inferred mass, and
volumetric. These methodologies differ significantly in the way they determine the ref-
erence quantity of fluid (prover quantity) for a proving. The reference quantity should
match the engineering units of the meter’s output. See API MPMS Ch. 4.8 for details of
the approved proving methods.
7.2.7.2 In-situ Proving (field)

In-situ proving, under actual operating conditions, provides the preferred means of es-
tablishing the meter factor for a Coriolis meter. The adjustment from indicated to actual
quantity can be made by applying:
 a mass meter (MFm) factor, to the mass indications
 a volume meter (MFv) factor to the volume indications
 a density meter (DMF) factor to the density indications
7.2.7.3 Laboratory Proving

Laboratory proving in place of field proving is not recommended for custody applications.
This method leads to greater measurement uncertainties than field proving. Due to the
inability to prove after zeroing, measurement uncertainties can increase. The increase
may result from the fact that it is impractical to duplicate the mechanical stresses of a field
installation in a lab proving. The difference in the observed zero value in the laboratory
and the observed zero value at the field location should be within a tolerance that is ac-
ceptable to the operator.
7.2.8 Application of the Meter Factor
The result of a meter proving will be a new meter factor. All meter factors (MFm, MFv,
DMF) shall only be applied in tertiary device(s) that are compliant with API MPMS Ch.
21.2.The meter factor shall not be applied in the transmitter. Application of the meter
factor in the transmitter will change the pulse output and the indicated quantity of the raw
frequency and thus not allowed. No factors or values (calibration, or configuration factors)
that affect the pulse output or indicated quantity shall be changed in the transmitter after
proving. When it is necessary to change any calibration or configuration factors in the
transmitter a proving shall be made to obtain a new meter factor prior to use for custody
measurements.
8 AUDITING, REPORTING AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

API MPMS Ch. 21.2 fully addresses the auditing and reporting requirements of a generic
Electronic Liquid Measurement (ELM) system. The audit requirements for quantity
(volume or mass) transactions using a Coriolis meter are similar, except for the addition of
specific configuration and setup parameters contained in the transmitter which shall be
auditable and securable.
8.1 Configuration Log
See API MPMS Ch. 21.2, “Electronic Liquid Measurement” for the general contents of the
Configuration Log. In addition, the K-factor, Manufacturer Density Calibration Factor(s),
and the Manufacturer Flow Calibration Factor(s) shall be included along with documen-
tation relating the manufacturer’s factors to a specific flow sensor (such as by serial
number). (evaluate after calculation annex is added)
8.2 Quantity Transaction Record (QTR)

See API MPMS Chapter 21.2, “Electronic Liquid Measurement” for the general contents
of the Quantity Transaction Record. There are no special requirements for Coriolis me-
ters. (evaluate after calculation annex is added)
8.3 Event Log
See API MPMS Ch. 21.2, “Electronic Liquid Measurement” for the general contents of the
Event Log. In addition, the zeroing of the Coriolis meter shall be recorded, including the
date and time the meter was zeroed, along with the as-found and as-left observed zero
value in engineering flow units. Recording some measure of zero stability is also useful.
8.4 Alarm and Error Log
There are no special requirements for the Alarm and Error Logs for Coriolis meters other
than those specified in API MPMS Ch. 21.2, “Electronic Liquid Measurement.” (evaluate
after calculation annex is added)
8.5 Security and Access

Configuration parameters and settings shall be secured against tampering or unauthor-
ized or un-documented changes. This may be achieved by using passwords and/or
tamper evident seals or locks. See API MPMS Ch. 21.2.
ANNEX A
(normative)
Zero Verification
A.1 ZERO VERIFICATION
As part of the normal startup for a Coriolis meter, a procedure shall be followed to verify
and record the observed zero value. In order to verify the observed zero value of the
meter, there shall be no flow through the flow sensor. The sensor shall be filled with the
liquid to be measured at normal operating conditions. The procedure to verify the zero
value is as follows:
1. Open bypass valve if so equipped.
2. Stop flow through the sensor by closing the downstream double block-and-bleed
valve and ensure seal integrity.
3. Close upstream valve if provided.
CAUTION: Isolating a fluid-filled system (blocking it in) can result in elevated pressures
if the temperature rises.
4. If a threshold is set in the meter to suppress the indication (low-flow cutoff, bi-
directional flow), then this value should be set to zero during this procedure.
Some transmitters allow the user to view the actual flow rate independently of the
low-flow cutoff setting.
5. The observed zero value will not normally be constant. Small variations are
expected and a properly zeroed meter will fluctuate between positive and nega-
tive flow rates within the manufacturer’s specified zero stability for that meter.
There could be some installation conditions which could be the cause of zero
instability such as:
 leaking valves
 two-phase fluid (gas breakout)
 external vibrations at interfering frequencies
6. After following the zero verification procedure:
If the observed zero value is found to be outside the operating company’s ex-
pectation for error (see Equation A-1) evaluate the installation for the conditions
listed in Section 5.2.3 and the following:
 possible pipe stress
 leaking valves
 extreme temperature changes of the product while zeroing
 mismatch of the transmitter/sensor

If the observed zero value is found to be within the operating company expecta-
tion for error, reset the low-flow cutoff to original settings.
To determine an acceptable observed zero value (see examples).
A log and possibly a graph should be maintained of all meter factors and zero adjust-
ments (observed zero values – as found and as left) so that trending of the meter’s per-
formance can be conducted per API MPMS Ch. 13.2.
A.2 ZERO VERIFICATION EXAMPLES
The following are examples of how to evaluate zero values in order to determine if the
meter needs or has to be zeroed. As a part of the meter proving process or when meter
factors shift beyond an operator’s tolerance, observe the zero value and record it for
evaluation. This observed zero value should be determined at the same conditions under
which the meter factor was determined.
The need to zero initially or at any time is based on the operator’s tolerance for the
amount a zero value or shift should be contributing to meter factor errors or shifts.
Initially, a meter shall be installed and brought to line/process conditions prior to evalu-
ating the zero value. Failure to properly purge the flowmeter prior to evaluating the zero
may lead to an incorrect evaluation. Once the meter is at operating conditions, observe
and record the flow rate, safely block the meter in, observe and record the zero value. Use
equation A-1 below to estimate the percent shift in the meter factor that can be contrib-
uted by zero value. The initial zero will only use the in equation A-1.
q
Err = -----0  100
0
qf (A-1)
where
Err0 = zero error (%)
q0 = observed zero value
qf = flow rate during normal operation
To determine if the meter needs to be zeroed evaluate if the % flow error of equation A-1
is within operator’s tolerance (e.g. 0.04 %). If the value is not in tolerance a new zero is
required. After performing a zero operation, the new observed zero value (as left, current)
should be compared to the recorded zero value (as found, previous).
In the case of the initial verification (startup verification) the recorded zero value (as
found) is expected to be “zero”. The meter shall be proved after the meter has been ze-
roed.
Equation A-2 below can be used to determine the amount the shift in the meter factor
relative to the difference in in “as found and “as left” zero values.
% Flow Error = ((ZVNEW – ZV) / FR)×100 (A-2)

where
ZV = the recorded zero value at meter factor determination (“as found”

recorded after the last proving)
ZVNEW = the current observed zero value
FR = flow rate of the line meter
If an observed zero value cannot be obtained within an acceptable tolerance an inves-

tigation into the cause should occur. Normally, a zero shift can be resolved by properly
installing the meter, purging the line and bringing the meter to line conditions. Reproving
the meter alone may not resolve a zero shift problem when the meter requires mainte-
nance, repair or the flow will deviate significantly from the current proving flow rate. If the
flow rate at operating conditions is below 10 % of the meter’s maximum range, the op-
erator’s zero tolerance may need to be increase to accommodate zero stability.
Several zero verification examples are provided below.
A.2.1 Example 1: Meter zeroing NOT required on initial installation
A new meter has been installed. There is no initial “observed” zero value for this instal-
lation, since it is a new meter. The assumed value for ZV would be “zero” (as found).
The new meter was brought to operating conditions and the observed zero value of the
meter at the current conditions was +0.7 lb/min. The difference in the current zero value
from the factory (0, as found)) is 0.7 lb/min. The expected flow rate of the line meter is
6005 lb/min, then:
Flow Error 0.01 % = ((0.7 – 0) / 6005) × 100
The meter would not require zeroing because this observed zero value could only con-
tribute 0.0001 shift in meter factor if or when proved at 6005 lb/min flow rate.
A.2.2 Example 2: Meter zeroing required
A meter was initially proved at a flow rate of 5000 lb/min with a +2.5 lb/min zero value (as
found). The meter factor of 0.9995 was generated.
At the next proving the meter factor was 0.9968. The observed zero value of the meter
after the proving and at the current conditions was +17 lb/min. The difference in the
current observed and the recorded zero value (as found) is 14.5 lb/min. If the line meter is
flowing at 5005 lb/min, then:
Flow Error 0.29 % = ((17 – 2.5) / 5005) × 100
The meter should be zeroed because this zero shift could be the cause of the 0.0027
meter factor shift. After zeroing the new observed zero value should be recorded and
calculated based on the same equation.
Prove the meter after zeroing and the new meter factor should be close to the original
meter of 0.9998 factor when the zero value was +2.5 lb/min. A new observed zero value
should be obtained after the prove and it becomes the “as found’ zero value for the new
meter factor.
A.2.3 Example 3: Meter zeroing NOT required
A meter was initially proved at a flow rate of 7000 lb/min with a +2.5 lb/min zero value (as
found), and the meter factor of 0.9997 was generated.
At the next proving the meter factor was 0.9990. Typically no action would be taken since
the meter factor only shifted 0.0007. If the observed zero value was determined to be +3.5
lb/min., the difference to the recorded zero value (as found) is 1 lb/min. If the flow rate for
this proving was 7700 lb/min, then meter does not need to zeroed because this zero shift
would only contribute to a 0.0001 shift in the meter factor.
0.012 % = ((3.5 – 2.5) / 7700) × 100
A.2.4 Example 4: Meter repair and proving may be required
A meter was initially proved at a flow rate of 6000 BPH with a +2.5 BPH zero value (as
found). The meter factor of 0.9996 was generated.
At the next proving the meter factor was 0.9958. The observed zero value of the meter
after the proving and at the current conditions was +25 BPH. The difference in the current
observed zero and the recorded zero value (as found) is 22.5 BPH. If the flow rate for this
proving was 6006 BPH, then
0.37 % = ((25 – 2.5) / 6006) × 100
The meter should be zeroed. After zeroing a new observed zero value was 20 BHP. This
zero value will contribute to a 0.0029 meter factor from the 0.9998.
0.29 % = ((20 – 2.5) / 6006) × 100
An investigation should occur to resolve the reason that an acceptable zero value could
not be obtained (it should be closer to 2.5 BPH). A new proving with the 20 BPH should
generate a meter factor near 0.9971. The new proving will only correct for this high zero
value at this flow rate. This zero value will contribute to more significant meter factor shifts
when the meter is operated at flow rates lower than 6,000 BPH. See next two examples.
A.2.5 Example 5: Zero Error contribution to meter factor linearity
A meter was initially proved at several flow rates to determine a meter factor curve with a
+2.5 BPH zero value (as found).
The observed zero value of the meter at the next verification was 7.5 BPH. The difference
in the observed zero and the as found value is 5 BPH. If the meter is proved again at the
same rates to verify the MF curve without zeroing, equation A-12 can be used to estimate
meter factor shift at any flow rate over the range of the meter. See the table below.
Flow Rate (BPH) 6006 5005 3754 2503 1251
Zero at Proving (ZV) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Obs Zero at Line (ZVnew) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
% Meter Factor Shift 0.08 0.1 0.13 0.2 0.4

A.2.6 Example 6: Zero contribution on meter factor linearity (graph-

ically)
A meter was proved at 5 flow rates to establish a linearity curve. The “as found” zero was
2 lb/min.
Figure A-1—Meter Factor Curve “as found” Zero
The meter was zeroed and the observed zero was 0.25 lb/min. The meter was proven
again at similar rates to establish new meter factor linearity. The 0.25 lb/min observed
zero value would be the new value for the old curve above and becomes the “as found”
value for the new meter factor curve.
Figure A-2 – Meter Factor Curve “as left” 0.25 lb/min zero
Equation A-2 can be used to estimate and validate the shift in the linearity curve.
Figure A-3 – Estimated Zero Change, Equation A-2

Annex B
(normative)
Coriolis Mass Measurement System
C.1 Mass Based Calculations for Coriolis Meters

Annex C
(informative)
System Design, Diagnostics And Verification Considerations
C.1 General
Consideration should be given to the following items before using Coriolis meters for custody
transfer measurements:
 External vibrations at specific frequencies can cause measurement errors.
 Two-phase flow (liquid/gas) is unacceptable.
 Meter systems should comply with all applicable codes and regulations. A schematic
diagram of a typical meter installation is shown in Figure C-1.
C.2 Piping
Where the flow range or pressure drop is too great for one meter, the installation of a bank of
meters in parallel can be used. When more than one meter is installed in parallel, a means
should be provided to balance flow through the meters and isolate the meters for proving pur-
poses.
Any condition that tends to contribute to vaporization or cavitation of the liquid stream should be
avoided by system design and by operating the meter within its specified flow range. Vaporiza-
tion or cavitation can be minimized or eliminated by maintaining sufficient pressure in and im-
mediately downstream of the meter. In lieu of actual test data to determine back-pressure re-
quirements at the outlet of the meter, the following equation can be applied:
Pb = 2p + 1.25 pe
(C-1)
where
Pb = minimum gauge back pressure at meter outlet
∆p = pressure drop across the flowmeter at the maximum operating flow rate
pe = absolute equilibrium vapor pressure of liquid at the maximum operating

temperature
NOTE For some dense-phase fluids, such as ethylene and high-purity ethane, these guide-
lines may not be sufficient.
Two-phase flow (liquid/gas) affects meter performance. A meter installation should be equipped
with air/vapor elimination equipment so that measurement accuracy is not degraded if there is
evidence of free-air or vapor.
The effect of fluid swirl and non-uniform velocity profiles caused by upstream and downstream
piping configuration on meter performance may differ from one meter design to another.
The meter should be oriented in a position that will assure that the measuring tube or tubes are
completely filled with fluid under all flow and static conditions, or provisions made to not measure
flow during no-flow conditions if gas can accumulate in the tubes and cause false readings (e.g.
spurious counting).
For volumetric measurement, thermowells for the temperature transmitter and test well should
be installed near the flow sensor so that the measured temperature is representative of the fluid
temperature in the meter. Normal practice is to install a thermowell downstream of the meter.
A pressure transmitter should be installed near the flow sensor. This pressure measurement
would be used to compensate for pressure effects (pressure compensation) on meter perfor-
mance and for fluid pressure correction (CPL) in volume applications.
Strainers or other protective devices should be installed upstream of the meter to remove foreign
objects which can cause measurement error.
Provide access to the transmitter for servicing and display readout and proving electrical con-
nections. Provide physical access for proving and service vehicles.
Avoid installations near sources of flow pulsation and vibration.
Figure C-1 – Typical Schematic for Coriolis Meter Installation

C.3 Stored Zero Value Verification
Valves to stop flow through the meter are needed to allow for zeroing. It is preferable to have
shut-off valves located both upstream and downstream of the meter to block it in during zeroing.
As a minimum, a block-and-bleed valve located downstream of the meter is required.
Stored zero value verification is required as part of the normal operating procedure for the meter.
C.4 Density Verification
In some measurement applications fluid density verification could be necessary. Consider the
following:
 Ability to sample product for lab analysis.
 Ability to attach pycnometer.
C.5 Valves
Valves in a meter installation which divert, control or block flow during metering or proving shall
be capable of smooth opening and closing. The critical valves shall provide a leak-proof shutoff
with a method of checking for leakage, such as a block and bleed. See Figure C-1.
For controlling intermittent flow, valves shall be of the fast-acting, shock-minimizing type so as to
avoid damaging the equipment and/or adversely affecting the accuracy of measurement.
Automatic devices, such as a flow-limiting control valve or restricting orifice, if required to prevent
flows in excess of the maximum rate of the meter, shall be installed downstream of the meter.
The device shall be selected or adjusted so that sufficient backpressure will be maintained to
avoid cavitation or vaporization.
Special considerations should be given to bidirectional installations to minimize the effect of
flow-limiting devices on the meter’s performance.
The meter shall be protected from pressure surges as well as from excessive pressures caused
by thermal expansion of the fluid when the installation is not operating. A relief valve, if used,
should not be installed between the prover and the meter.
C.6 Proving Facilities
Facilities shall be provided for proving the meter under normal operating conditions.
Stability of temperature, pressure, flow rate, and product composition is necessary to achieve
acceptable proving repeatability.
Metering systems should be provided with either manual or automatic means to permit proving
the meter under conditions of flow rate, flow direction, pressure, temperature, and fluid char-
acteristics that exist during the normal operation of the meter.
Connections for proving shall be installed so air or vapor is not trapped in the piping between the
meter and the prover. Adequate bleed-off connections should be provided (see API MPMS
Ch. 4.8). Reducing the distance between the meter and prover can minimize problems with
proving results. It is recommended that the sensor be located upstream of the proving connec-
tion.
Consider the location and distance between the proving connections and the transmitter for
meter proving. Unlike other meter types, where the pulse generation for meter proving is located
at the primary element, the Coriolis meter’s pulse generation for meter proving is located at the
transmitter. If the transmitter is not located near the proving facility, then a remote termination
junction box should be provided near the proving facility to provide access to the meter pulse
generation for interfacing the proving computer.
C.7 System Set-up
Coriolis measurement systems can have numerous inputs for correction and adjustment in-
cluding inputs for pressure. Correction and calibration factors that may affect the mass, volume,
density, or flow rate determined by the meter are depicted in Figure C-2. See Section 3 for more
information on the individual factors.
Figure C-2 – Variables Affecting Coriolis Measurement
C.8 Diagnostic Measurements

Coriolis meter designs can offer diagnostics that automatically or through a manual process
identify conditions that affect meter performance. Diagnostic methods can require the use of an
external tool or can be integrated into meter design.
The following lists examples of parameters or analysis measures that a manufacturer can pro-
vide for diagnostic measurement via a local display or a digital interface (e.g. RS-232, RS-485):
 EPROM checksum
 Configuration change flag
 Drive gain or power indication
 Pickoff or signal amplitude
 Temperature output(s)
 Live zero flow indication
 Status and measurement quality indicators
 Alarm and failure indicators
 Flowing density or flow tube resonant frequency
 Flow tube health indication
 Flow tube balance or symmetry
 Frequency output test
 Digital status output test

 Analog output test
NOTE Please consult manufacturer for the diagnostic parameters that are available.
To further optimize the use of diagnostics, the operator should establish a baseline of the me-
ter’s diagnostic indicators either manually and/or through an automated process inherent to the
meters design during either meter calibration, initial installation, or both. Deviations from base-
line diagnostics are useful in establishing acceptance criteria. During the calibration, meter di-
agnostics can be monitored for alarm or an out of tolerance condition. If an advanced diagnostic
for flow tube health exists, this diagnostic test can be performed after calibration is complete and
results reported. Actual diagnostic capabilities vary by design; the user should consult with the
manufacturer to determine an appropriate set of diagnostics for the particular design.
A meter log file generated at calibration can establish the meter baseline data. Meter log data
and/or the results of an automated flow tube health diagnostic may be included to provide a
baseline of the metering module performance at calibration. This baseline data can be used to
verify the meter’s performance upon startup, during operation, and after component changes.
The baseline data can also be useful in conducting health checks of the metering module. It is
recommended that the manufacturers identify the parameters that define the baseline perfor-
mance for their products.
C.9 Installation Baseline
The operator typically establishes the field baseline for the meter, either manually or through an
automated process inherent to the meter’s design, during the meter’s initial installation. Some
parameters that can be used to baseline a Coriolis meter’s performance are drive current,
sensor amplitude, and zero value. Some manufacturers offer diagnostics that infer change in a
meter’s flow performance or flow factor. These baseline relationships are useful in establishing
acceptance criteria for the various relationships and the need for a flow performance test and
adjustment (if necessary).
C.10 Maintenance
Users should follow the manufacturer’s recommendations for maintenance. Monitoring diag-
nostics, performing periodic meter verification procedures, and possibly the trending/long-term
monitoring of performance indicators, can identify if abnormal conditions develop.
Maintenance procedures, like cleaning, should be condition-based (based upon meter diag-
nostics, meter factors, process conditions, and/or meter usage). The monitoring of performance
indicators can identify the need for cleaning. For example, by monitoring the measured flowing
density and comparing it to the calculated/real density, it is possible to infer coating of the of the
flow tubes. Performance indicators available to the user are design specific and the meter
manufacturer should be consulted on performance indicators available and their interpretation.
C.11 Meter Verification
The field verification of a Coriolis metering system consists of monitoring and evaluating me-
tering conditions, diagnostic indicators output by the transmitter, and/or ancillary devices of the
metering system designed to identify possible change in the system’s performance and the
cause. The evaluation of these indicators can guide the operator in determining the need to
re-zero the meter, execute a meter proving, adjust maintenance intervals, and implement design
improvements, if necessary, to the metering system.
The operator should follow design-specific meter verification procedures recommended by the
manufacturer and as a minimum the following general meter verification procedures should be
performed:
 Diagnostic indicators—Verify all transmitter diagnostic indicators to be in the normal
state.
 Zero check—Perform a zero verification.
 Transmitter calibration data—Verify the flow and density calibration factors and any
correction factors in the configuration of the transmitter to be unchanged from most
recent proving. The meter transmitter verification should coincide with the meter zero
verification.
 Sensor Verification —Sensor diagnostics can be available that continuously,
on-command, or procedurally verify the performance of the sensor and/or infers
change in measurement performance.
Users should consult the meter manufacturer for the availability of these types of diagnostics.
C.12 Proving Interval

Some regulatory agencies and/or contracts specify a proving interval. In some cases meter
diagnostics can be used to assess the condition of the meter. The user could develop a method
and procedure to determine whether the proving frequency can be extended.
Annex D
(informative)
Factory Calibration of Coriolis Meter
During factory calibration, the output of a Coriolis meter under test is compared with a standard
of higher accuracy to establish an initial calibration factor. Coriolis meters are typically factory
calibrated on gravimetric flow stands that are traceable to a national standard or by comparison
to other traceable flow standards.
Gravimetric flow stands typically flow water through the meter which is collected in a tank on a
weigh scale (see Figure D-1). The mass readout from the meter is compared to the weigh scale
mass indication, corrected for buoyancy effect. The calibration factor converts the sensor output
to a flow rate in desired engineering units. Multiple tests at different flow rates establish a re-
peatable calibration factor within the meter’s accuracy tolerance.
A separate calibration is performed on the density measurement of the meter. Density (ρ) of the
fluid contained within the vibrating tubes is inversely proportional to the tube frequency (ƒ) of the
sensor assembly. This relationship is represented by the following equation.
1
  ---2
f (D-1)
where
ρ = flowing density
ƒ = tube frequency, resonant frequency of the sensor
Factory calibration of density involves measurement of the tube frequency from the sensor and
the density value of the calibration fluid while the meter is full of fluid, either in a static or flowing
state. Most density meters are calibrated with two or more fluids (generally air and water) whose
density values are well defined and relatively stable. Density values for the fluid(s) can be de-
termined either by using equations of state or calculations from laboratory data or by incorpo-
rating a transfer standard to determine the density of the fluid during calibration.
For convenience, and to establish traceability to acceptable standards, the test fluids may be
referenced to base conditions of temperature and pressure using equations outlined in API
MPMS Ch. 14.6. All the factory parameters should be measured with instruments traceable to
NIST or another internationally recognized national metrology institute (NMI).
The factory calibration produces the coefficients that define the density per time period squared
relationship for each density meter. This equation is then linearly interpolated or extrapolated by
the transmitter to determine fluid density in the field.
Figure D-1 – Calibration System Schematic

Annex F
Pressure Compensation
To be developed
Bibliography
[1] API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 4.8, Operation of Proving
Systems
[2] API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 11.1, Volume Correction
Factors
[3] API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 13.2, Statistical Methods of
Evaluating Meter Proving Data
[4] API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 14.6, Continuous Density
Measurement
[5] API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 21.2, Electronic Liquid
Volume Measurement Using Positive Displacement and Turbine Meters

Api MPSM Cap 5 Sec 6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Api MPSM Cap 5 Sec 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

[Type text]

Section 6—Measurement of Liquid

SECOND EDITION, MONTH 2016

Section 6—Measurement of Liquid Hydrocarbons by Coriolis Meters

API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter Ch. 12.2, Calculation of

3 TERMS, DEFINITIONS, AND SYMBOLS

3.1 Terms and Definitions

The observed zero value before a meter is zeroed.

3.2 Acronyms and Symbols (waiting on calculations group likely to be placed in

CPLp = correction for pressure effect on fluid at the prover

CPSp = correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover

CTLm = correction for thermal expansion of fluid at the Coriolis meter

CTLp = correction for thermal expansion of fluid at the prover

CTSp = correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover

IMm = indicated Coriolis meter mass

IVm = indicated Coriolis meter volume

KFm = K-factor in units of pulses per unit mass

KFv = K-factor in units of pulses per unit volume

5.1 Flow Sensor Considerations

5.2 Flow Sensor Tube Design

and fluid properties including corrosiveness and abrasiveness

Temperature effects on the tubes shall be compensated.

Pressure compensation is recommended. The decision to pressure compensate for tube

5.2.2 Pressure Rating

Figure 1–Typical Meter Factor Linearity

Figure 2 –Typical Run Repeatability Variation

 Flow sensor housings constructed as a pressure-containing vessel, designed

5.3 Transmitter Considerations

5.4 System Design Considerations

6.1 Meter Commissioning

6.2 Conditions Affecting Meter Performance

 Fluid temperature—Changes in fluid temperature affect the elasticity of the

 Fluid pressure—Changes in pressure affect the vibrational characteristics of

 Two-phase stream—Gas or air in a liquid stream is detrimental to accurate

 Flashing and/or cavitation within the flow sensor—Sufficient backpressure

 Coatings or deposits within the flow sensor—Heavy or non-uniform coating can

6.2.1 Fluid Properties

6.3 Considerations for zeroing

6.4.1 Flow Sensor Repair or Replacement

7.2 Proving Considerations

 Number of Runs for a Proving

 Contributors to Increased Random Uncertainty

 Reasons for Non-reproducibility

7.2.7.2 In-situ Proving (field)

7.2.7.3 Laboratory Proving

8 AUDITING, REPORTING AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

8.2 Quantity Transaction Record (QTR)

8.5 Security and Access

A.1 ZERO VERIFICATION

3. Close upstream valve if provided.

6. After following the zero verification procedure:

 mismatch of the transmitter/sensor

A.2 ZERO VERIFICATION EXAMPLES

% Flow Error = ((ZVNEW – ZV) / FR)×100 (A-2)

ZV = the recorded zero value at meter factor determination (“as found”

If an observed zero value cannot be obtained within an acceptable tolerance an inves-

A.2.1 Example 1: Meter zeroing NOT required on initial installation

Flow Error 0.01 % = ((0.7 – 0) / 6005) × 100

A.2.2 Example 2: Meter zeroing required

Flow Error 0.29 % = ((17 – 2.5) / 5005) × 100

A.2.3 Example 3: Meter zeroing NOT required

0.012 % = ((3.5 – 2.5) / 7700) × 100

A.2.4 Example 4: Meter repair and proving may be required