A New Calibration Method For Ultrasonic Clamp-On Flowmeters IFMC Coventry 2015

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/315382052
A New Calibration Method for Ultrasonic Clamp-on Flowmeters
Conference Paper · July 2015
CITATIONS READS
0 259
4 authors, including:
Bernhard Funck Rainer Engel

Flexim GmbH Ingenieur-Büro Dr. Engel
5 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS 54 PUBLICATIONS 183 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
PTB's high-accuracy water flow calibration facility (national liquid flow standard facility of Germany) View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Rainer Engel on 19 March 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Flow Measurement Conference 2015 Coventry, UK
Advances and Developments in Industrial Flow Measurement 1-2 Jul, 2015
A New Calibration Method for Ultrasonic

Clamp-on Flowmeters
Bernhard Funck, Flexim GmbH, Berlin
Erkan Kublay, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Braunschweig
Rainer Engel, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Braunschweig
Mathias Panicke, Flexim GmbH, Berlin
1 INTRODUCTION
Ultrasonic clamp-on flowmeters basically provide non-invasive flow metering capabili-
ties. The ultrasonic transducers are installed on the outside of the pipe at the meas-
urement location in the field. Therefore, a factory calibration of a clamp-on
flowmeter cannot include a meter body. Conventionally, when a calibration for a
clamp-on flowmeter is required, it is performed at a calibration facility designed for
invasive flowmeters. This means that the pipe and the flow profile conditions of the
calibration facility represent elements which cause impacts on the calibration results
although the pipe is not delivered with the flow meter into the field. This is a valid
method if the flow conditions can be assumed to be ideal and the uncertainty in the
pipe geometry can be assumed negligible. While the pipe geometry in a flow lab
usually is known very accurately, it is very difficult to provide ideal flow conditions.
Therefore it is desirable to find a method that allows for calibrating a Clamp-on flow
meter independently of the pipe and the flow profile which are not part of the meter
that is delivered to the measurement location. The aim of this project is to investi-
gate the transferability of such a new calibration technology into the field.
The meter formula of an ultrasonic flowmeter includes an acoustic calibration factor,
a fluid mechanic calibration factor for the flow profile influence and a geometric cali-
bration factor which is identical to the inner cross sectional area of the pipe. Whereas
the acoustic calibration factor is part of the flowmeter, the other two factors adhere
to the measurement location in the field. The new calibration method determines the
acoustic calibration factor directly and, thereby, enables the calibration of the clamp-
on flow meter independently of the pipe. It also enables to replace or recalibrate
transducers at any time after the initial installation without the need to recalibrate
the meter.
This paper covers the results of research cooperation, over three years, between the
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) and Flexim GmbH. The project was
funded by the Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy. The aim of this coop-
eration was to investigate the transferability of the new calibration technology for
ultrasonic clamp-on flowmeters into the field. Quantifying the transferability requires
the realization of field conditions in a flow lab while keeping the uncertainty of the
flow profile influences and the pipe geometry substantially lower than the uncertainty
of the acoustic calibration factor. Such conditions can be provided by the hydrody-
namic test field (HTF) of PTB in Braunschweig. The HTF represents the German na-
tional standard of liquid flow measurands. It is operated with the fluid "water" in a
flowrate range from 0.3 m³/h to 2100 m³/h, at a level of expanded relative meas-
urement uncertainty as low as 0.02 %.
The investigations were conducted on three pipes with 50 mm, 100 mm and 300 mm
nominal pipe diameter. The fluid mechanic calibration factor, in this project, was de-
termined from the flow profile measured by means of a Laser Doppler anemometer
(LDA).
1
2 THE MEASUREMENT PRINCIPLE

A main advantage of the new calibration method is that it enables the calibration of
the transducers and the transmitter of a clamp-on ultrasonic flow meter without a
metering tube being involved. This possibility can be derived from the meter formula
which represents the physical model of the measurement principle[1]. The average
path velocity along the sound path is calculated from the transit time difference ∆t
and the transit time t fl in the fluid as
∆t
=
vl K a ⋅ . (1)
2t fl
Here the acoustic calibration factor Ka is a parameter of the transducers that can be
calculated from the angle α and the sound speed cα in the coupling wedge. The
propagation angles β and γ in the pipe wall and the fluid are given by Snells law:
= α sin α
K a c= β sin β
c= cγ sin γ (2)
The volumetric flow is calculated from the average path velocity by multiplying it with
the pipe inner cross A section and the fluid mechanic calibration factor K Re :
∆t
V =A ⋅ K Re ⋅ vl =A ⋅ K Re ⋅ K a ⋅ (3)
2t fl
In this formula the properties of the measuring section, the flow profile, the trans-
ducers and the transmitter are represented by factors being independent of each oth-
er. Thus they can be determined independently of each other. The transducer and
the transmitter are calibrated in the factory. The cross sectional area A of the meas-
uring section is measured when installing the meter. The fluid mechanic calibration
factor relates the mean velocity over the cross-section of the pipe to the average
path velocity:
vA
K Re = (4)
vl
Figure 1 Calibration factors
The fluid mechanic calibration factor K Re is calculated by the meter based on an em-
pirical model of the flow profile. This model describes a fully developed turbulent flow
profile and is parameterized by the Reynolds number and the roughness of the inner
pipe wall.
2
3 THE NEW CALIBRATION METHOD

In Equ. (3), the properties of the transducers are represented by the acoustic cali-
bration factor K a defined by Equ. (2) which can be calculated from the geometry
and sound velocity of the transducer coupling wedge. The uncertainty of K a thus is
determined by the tolerances of the material properties and the manufacturing toler-
ances of the wedge. Better accuracy can be achieved by calibrating the acoustic cali-
bration factor K a . This can be done indirectly by a flow calibration. Using Equ. (3),
the transducer constant is determined by comparing the volume flow measured by
the test instrument with the reference volume flow. This implies that the cross-
sectional pipe area A and the fluid mechanic calibration factor K Re have to be well
known, as their uncertainty directly affects the calibration result. The new calibration
method, however, permits a direct calibration of the acoustic calibration factor. The
approach is explained, below, from the physical principle the transit time flowmeter is
based on.
The transit time flow measurement is based on the lateral displacement the ultrason-
ic signal experiences when traveling through a flowing fluid. The new calibration pro-
cedure makes use of the equivalence of this effect to a relative displacement of the
transducers when the fluid is not flowing. Figure 2a shows the transducers mounted
on the pipe and the sound signal without flow and with flow (dashed line). The ultra-
sonic signal is shifted in an axial direction by the flowing fluid by the amount ∆x . The
part of the sonic path within the receiving transducer is reduced accordingly and thus
the transit time is reduced by the transit time difference ∆t . As this is a relative dis-
placement of the ultrasonic signal with respect to the transducer, the same effect will
be achieved when one of the transducers is relocated relative to the other transducer
when the fluid is not flowing (Figure 2b). The calibration consists of measuring the
local displacement ∆x and the corresponding time difference ∆t . The transducer
constant K a is calculated as follows:
∆x
Ka = (5)
∆t
Figure 2 a) Sound path with and without flow

b) Sound path without flow, transducer displaced
The calibration facility at FLEXIM GmbH that realises this method controls the dis-
placement between the transducers with an accuracy of 1 μm. The uncertainty of the
time difference measurement is below 1/5000 of the signal period length. The total
uncertainty of the aperture calibration is therefore in the range 0.1 % ... 0.25 %, de-
pending on transducer type.
3
4 QUANTIFICATION OF THE TRANSFERABILITY OF THE NEW CALIBRA-

TION METHOD INTO THE FIELD
The task of verifying the transferability of the new calibration method into the field
can be split into two subtasks:
1. Verifying the reproducibility of the calibration with various transducer speci-

mens;
2. Verifying the independence of the factors in Equ. (3).
For the first task a number of transducers of the same type were investigated under
the same application conditions.
The second task was achieved by determining the reproducibility with varying appli-
cation conditions. These conditions were the pipe dimensions, temperature and
Reynolds number. The reproducibility was quantified as the difference between the
reference volumetric flow and the flow calculated from the path velocity of the ultra-
sonic meter by multiplying it with the cross sectional area A of the pipe and the fluid
mechanic calibration factor K Re as determined from the LDA measurement:
 V − K ⋅ A ⋅ v
∆V= (6)
REF Re l _ DUT
When the ultrasonic flow meter is applied in the field, the fluid mechanical calibration
factor K Re is calculated by the meter. In order to exclude the flow profile influence in
this investigation, K Re here was determined from the flow profile measured by the LDA
by a numerical evaluation of Equ. (4). With a fully developed flow profile the average
velocity vl of the flow velocity along a path of length L can be derived from the axial
component of the velocity profile as follows:
1
vz ( l ) dl
L ∫L
vl =
(7)
Assuming that the velocity profile does not change in axial direction within the meas-
urement volume the path integral can be replaced by an integral along the radius of
the pipe:
R
1
vz ( r ) dr
2 R −∫R
vl = (8)
The average velocity v A over the cross-sectional area of the pipe is:
1
v ( r , ϕ ) dA
A ∫A
vA =
(9)
Thus the fluid mechanical calibration factor K Re results to:
1
vz ( r , ϕ ) dA
K=
vA
= A ∫A (10)
Re R
vl 1
vz ( r ) dr
2 R −∫R
4
With the area average and the path average of the velocity profile measured by the
LDA, v A _ LDA and vl _ LDA , K Re is:
v A _ LDA
K Re =
vl _ LDA
(11)
5 MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
5.1 Reproducibility with Various Transducer Specimen at the Same
Location
A number of transducers of the same type were investigated at the same location.
The reproducibility was quantified by the standard deviation of the error compared to
the standard deviation of the acoustical calibration factors of the set of transducers.
5.2 Reproducibility with Varying Application Conditions
The independency of the calibration of the transducers was quantified with varying
application conditions. The range of application conditions is listed in Table 1.
6 MEASUREMENT SETUP
6.1 Hydrodynamic Test Field
The measurements were conducted in the Hydrodynamic Test Field (HTF) of PTB in
Braunschweig. The HTF can provide flow in the range of 0.3 m³/h through
2100 m3/h with a pressure range of 2 through 6 bar and a temperature range of
10 °C through 35 °C. Line A in the figure below is designed for diameters between
200 mm and 400 mm. Line B is optimized for diameters between 20 mm and
150 mm.
6.2 Location of Flow Measurement

The Figure 4 shows a principal drawing of the arrangement of the measurement sec-
tions (flow from left to right). There are two LDA chambers, one before and one after
the location where the ultrasonic transducers were installed. The purpose of this was
to quantify the profile change from before and after the measurement location (see
section0). For the profile reference, the chamber directly downstream of the location
of the transducers was used. Two pairs of transducers were installed simultaneously.
Table 1 Range of parameter variations
Parameter Range
Nominal pipe diameter 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm
Transducer frequency 2 MHz, 4 MHz 2 MHz, 4 MHz 1 MHz, 2 MHz
Fluid temperature 10°C … 35°C
Fluid point velocity 0.5 m/s … 5 m/s
Reynolds number (Re) 30E+03 … 2.5E+06
Characteristics of flow profile Non-disturbed
5
Figure 3 Cut-away view of PTB’s Hydrodynamic Test Field (HTF)
Installation area for the transducers >3D
Inlet flow section 40D Measurement section 4 m Outlet 10D
LDA chamber LDA chamber
Figure 4 Measurement pipe section
6.3 LDA Path Velocity Measurement

Laser Doppler Anemometry (LDA) is a non-invasive optical method for measuring the
flow velocity fields [2][3][4][5][6][7]. In this project the LDA was used to measure
the flow velocity along the ultrasonic path. The aim was to provide a reference for
the fluid mechanical calibration factor. The access to the pipe flow was provided by a
glass chamber.
LDA uses the Doppler shift in a laser beam to measure the velocity in transparent or
semi-transparent fluid flows. The LDA, applied here, crosses two beams of collimat-
ed, monochromatic, and coherent laser light in the flow of the fluid being measured.
The two coherent beams are obtained by splitting a single beam. A transmitting op-
tics focuses the beams to intersect at their focal points, where they interfere and
generate a set of straight fringes. As particles entrained in the fluid pass through the
fringes, they reflect light that is then collected by a receiving optics and focused on a
photodetector (see Figure 5).
6
Figure 5 Principle of LDA measurement
The reflected light fluctuates in intensity, the frequency of which is equivalent to the
Doppler shift between the incident and scattered light, and is thus proportional to the
component of particle velocity which lies in the plane of two laser beams. If the sen-
sor is aligned to the flow such that the fringes are perpendicular to the flow direction,
the electrical signal from the photo detector will then be proportional to the flow ve-
locity, assuming that the particle are moving with flow velocity.
6.4 Ultrasonic Transducers

The transducer types applied were selected according to the pipe sizes as shown in
the figure below. Due to overlapping application ranges it was possible to use two
different transducer sizes on each pipe size.
The transducers were mounted on the 4m long section of pipe between the two LDA
chambers as shown in Figure 6. Four pairs of transducers of the same type were
tested simultaneously. Each two of them were installed at the same axial position
oriented at +-45° measured along the pipe circumference (see Figure 6).
Table 2 Transducer selection for the tests
Nominal diameter 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm
Transducer type FSP FSQ FSP FSQ FSP FSM

Transducer 2 MHz 4 MHz 2 MHz 4 MHz 2 MHz 1 MHz
frequency
6.5 Geometry of the Measuring Pipe

The 100 mm pipe and the 300 mm pipe were standard stainless steel welded pipes.
The 50 mm pipe was a standard stainless steel seamless pipe. The wall thickness
was measured by an ultrasonic probe that was calibrated to the sound speed of the
pipe wall. The outer diameter was measured by a pipe circumference tape measure.
7
-45°
+45°
Figure 6 Setup with LDA chamber and 2 different transducer types,

each one in 2 planes +-45°, at a pipe 100 mm pipe.
6.6 Geometry of the LDA Glass Pipe

The geometry parameters of the glass pipe according to the specification given by the
manufacturer are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 Geometrical parameter of the LDA glass pipe
Type 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm
Uncertainty of inner diameter +/- 0.05 mm +/- 0.05 mm +/- 0.1 mm

Inner diameter 55.0 mm 107.3 mm 299.5 mm
Wall thickness 2.2 mm 3.1 mm 7.0 mm
6.7 Inflow Conditions

To confirm that the flow profile at the location of the ultrasonic transducers was the
same as at the LDA chamber, the profile was measured both, at the inlet and at the
outlet of the measurement section. The difference between these two measurements
was used as a measure for the change of the profile along the measurement section.
This investigation was done for a range of flow velocities and temperature. Examples
of the profile plots for two of the three measurement sections are shown in Figure 7
and Figure 8.
8
Figure 7 Flow profile at the inlet (left) and the outlet (right) of the measurement
section, Pipe nominal diameter 100 mm
Figure 8 Flow profile at the inlet (left) and the outlet (right) of the measurement
section, Pipe nominal diameter 300 mm.
The numerical evaluation of the fluid mechanic calibration factor K Re from the profile
measurement is shown in Table 5 to Table 10. It can be seen that there is a differ-
ence between inlet and outlet of up to 1.3 %. There is also a difference between the
two planes at +45° and -45° of up to 0.6 %. This shows that the inflow conditions
were not completely ideal. The best conditions were achieved at the 50 mm pipe.
Table 4 K Re in two planes at the inlet and the outlet of the measurement section,
pipe nominal diameter 100 mm
K Re Inlet Outlet Difference
Path 1 -45° 0,924 0,9353 -1,248 %

Path 2 +45° 0,921 0,9330 -1,337 %
Difference -0,331 % -0,242 %
Path 1 -45° 0,950 0,943 0,789 %

Path 2 +45° 0,956 0,948 0,833 %
Difference 0,587 % 0,543 %
9
Path 1 -45° 0,934 0,938 -0,342 %

Path 2 +45° 0,935 0,941 -0,559 %
Difference 0,101 % 0,319 %
7 MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY OF THE TRANSFERABILITY
The transferability of the transducer calibration into the field is quantified as the dif-
ference ∆V given by Equ. (6). Following ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008 [8], the uncer-
tainty of ∆V is
2 2
 ∂∆V   ∂∆V 
u ( ∆V )  u (VREF )  +  u ( K Re ) 
2
=  

 ∂VREF   ∂K Re 
2
. (12)
  ∂∆V 
2
 ∂∆V
+ u ( A) +  u ( vl _ DUT ) 
 ∂A   ∂vl _ DUT 
This results in the following relative uncertainty:

u ( ∆V ) u (VREF ) u ( K Re )2 u ( A )2 u ( vl _ DUT )
2 2 2
= + + + (13)
VREF
2
VREF
2 2
K Re A2 vl2_ DUT
The uncertainty of the fluid mechanic calibration factor K Re , according to Equ. (11),
is given by:
u ( K Re ) u ( v A _ LDA ) u ( vl _ LDA )
2 2 2
= + (14)
K Re v 2A _ LDA vl2_ LDA
The path velocity vl _ DUT is calculated by the meter under test from the acoustic cali-
bration factor K a and the measured transit time difference ∆t and transit time t fl in
the fluid according to Equ. (1). The relative uncertainty of the path velocity, there-
fore, is given by the relative uncertainty of the acoustic calibration factor and the rel-
ative uncertainty ur _ transm of the transit time measurement.
u ( vl _ DUT ) u ( Ka )
2 2
= + ur2_ transm (15)

vl2_ DUT K a2
The cross-sectional area of the pipe is calculated from the outer diameter and the
wall thickness as
π
= ( Do − 2w )
2
A (16)
4
10
The relative uncertainty of A thus is
u ( A)
2 2 2 2
 ∂A 1   ∂A 1  2   −4 
2

=  u ( Do )  +  u ( w) =  u ( Do )  +  u ( w )  (17)
 ∂Do A   ∂w A   Do − w   Do − w
2
A 
The assumption Do  w yields:
u ( A)  u ( Do )   w u ( w ) 
2 2 2
= 2 2  + 4  (18)
A  Do   Do w 
The total uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability thus is:
u ( ∆V ) u (VREF ) u ( v A _ LDA ) u ( vl _ LDA )

2 2 2 2
= 2 + +
VREF
2
VREF v 2A _ LDA vl2_ LDA
(19)
 u ( Do )   w u ( w )  u ( K a )
2 2 2
+ 2  + 4  + 2
+ ur2_ transm
 Do   Do w  Ka
The numerical evaluation of Equ. (19), for the three test locations, is shown in Ta-
ble 7 through Table 9. The uncertainty components are listed in the left column.
The individual relative standard uncertainties are shown in 6th column. The rightmost
column shows the uncertainty contributions.
The uncertainty of the reference flow rate is equal to the uncertainty of the test facili-
ty. The uncertainties of the pipe dimensions are the uncertainties of mechanical
measurements. The uncertainty of the path velocity measurement is calculated fol-
lowing the procedure described in [9]. In order to estimate the uncertainty of the
mean velocity v A _ LDA measured by LDA, a factor K LDA was calculated by using the
mean velocity v A _ ref in the LDA chamber, calculated from the reference flow rate:
v A _ LDA
K LDA = (20)
v A _ ref
Ideally, this factor should be independent of the flow profile, and thus also independ-
ent of the Reynolds number. Therefore, the uncertainty of v A _ LDA was quantified by
the standard deviation of K LDA with the Reynolds number. At the 50 mm pipe and
the 300 mm pipe, this uncertainty contribution is about 0.3 %. At the 100 mm pipe,
however, it is 1 %, which is much more than expected.
The uncertainty of the acoustic calibration factor is equal to the uncertainty of the
transducer calibration method, which is u ( K a ) = 0.15 % [10]. The uncertainty of the
time measurement was calculated according to the recommendations given by ISO
12242:2012 [1].
11
Table 7 Uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability,

Uncertainty component Symbol Distribution Standard Unit rel. standard rel. Variance Uncertainty
uncertainty uncertainty sensitivity contribution
factors
Xi u(x i ) u (x i )/x i ci ci² * u(x i )²/x i 2 ci * u (x i )/x i
Reference flow rate u V.REF normal - 0,010% 1 0,00000001 0,010%
Pipe outer diameter u D.o_MUT normal 0,1 [mm] 0,166% 2 1,09644E-05 0,331%
Pipe thickness u w normal 0,05 [mm] 1,852% 0,18 1,09644E-05 0,331%
Mean velocity of the LDA u v.A_LDA normal - 0,378% 1,0 1,4287E-05 0,378%
Path velocity of the LDA u v.l_LDA normal - 0,236% -1,0 5,59268E-06 0,236%
Acoustic calibration factor u K. α normal - 0,150% 1 0,00000225 0,150%
Time measurement u r_transm normal - 0,300% 1 0,000009 0,300%
Combined uncertainty 0,728%
Expanded uncertainty (k=2) U ΔV 1,457%

factors
Mean velocity of the LDA u v.A_LDA normal - 1,008% 1,0 0,000101516 1,008%
Acoustic calibration factor u K. α normal 0,150% 1 0,00000225 0,150%
Time measurement u r_transm normal 0,300% 1 0,000009 0,300%

factors
Mean velocity of the LDA u v.A_LDA normal - 0,289% 1,0 8,35152E-06 0,289%
Acoustic calibration factor u K. α normal 0,150% 1 0,00000225 0,150%
Time measurement u r_transm normal 0,300% 1 0,000009 0,300%
8 RESULTS
8.1 Reproducibility with Varying Transducer Specimen Under the Same
Application Conditions
20 sets of transducers type FSQ (4 MHz) where installed at the 100 mm pipe. The
transducers were taken from two different lots. Two transducers were tested simul-
taneously at the measurement planes +45° and -45°, respectively.
12
Figure 9 Distribution of the acoustical calibration factor over measurement error

Figure 9 shows the acoustic calibration factor found by the in-house calibration plot-
ted over the flow error found at the test location. The average over the whole set of
transducers was subtracted in both numbers. The differences between the two lots
are clearly visible. The effect of the transducer calibration can be seen when compar-
ing the difference between the two lots with the difference of the error between the
two lots. As shown in Table 10, the average difference between the two lots is
1.06 %. The difference between the average measurement errors of the two lots is
only -0.18 %. The standard deviation of the acoustical calibration factor is 0.56 %.
The standard deviation of the measurement error is only 0.22 %.
Table 10 Reproducibility with varying transducer specimen

Acoustic calibration factor Error
Average difference between the two lots 1,062% -0,18%
Standard deviation 0,56% 0,22%
8.2 Reproducibility with Varying Application Conditions

The reproducibility is quantified according to Equ. (6), as the difference between the
reference volumetric flow and the flow calculated from the path velocity of the ultra-
sonic meter by multiplying it with the fluid mechanical calibration factor as deter-
mined from the LDA measurement and the cross sectional area of the measuring
pipe. The average errors for all Reynolds numbers are shown in Figure 10 through
Figure 12. The figures show the error at the two path orientations +45° and -45° as
shown in Figure 6 for different temperatures. For the 50 mm pipe and the 100 mm
pipe the errors are below the uncertainty estimates shown in Table 7 and in Table 8.
The maximum error at the 300 mm pipe shown in Figure 12 is 1.2 %, which is above
the uncertainty estimate of 0,9 % shown in Table 9. This can be explained by the
13
non-ideal inflow conditions at this pipe. The LDA chambers at this location were
about 5 % smaller than the pipe diameter of the measurement section. Therefore,
the flow profile at the location of the ultrasonic transducers could differ from the pro-
file within the LDA chambers. The reduction inside the chambers caused a flattening
of the profile. This would lead to an increase in the fluid mechanic calibration factor
which explains the errors to be negative.
Figure 10 DN 50: Average error over all Reynolds numbers

for transducer types FSQ and FSP at path orientations +-45°
Figure 11 DN 100. Average error over all Reynolds numbers

for transducer types FSQ and FSP at path orientations +-45°
14
Figure 12 DN 300. Average error over all Reynolds numbers

for transducer types FSP and FSM at path orientations +-45°
9 SUMMARY
This paper has presented a new method for calibrating transducers for Clamp-on ul-
trasonic flow meters that allows calibrating the transducers independently of the
transmitter and without the need for a flow calibration facility. Therefore, the uncer-
tainties caused by non-ideal flow profile conditions and by the pipe geometry of the
calibration facility, are excluded from the calibration of the transducers. Another ad-
vantage of the independent transducer calibration is the possibility to exchange or
recalibrate transducers after the installation of the flow meter in the field without in-
validating the calibration of the flow transmitter.
The transferability of the transducer calibration to the field was investigated in re-
search cooperation with the PTB at the hydrodynamic test field (HTF) in
Braunschweig, which represents the German national standard of liquid flow
measurands. The investigations were conducted on three pipes with 50 mm,
100 mm and 300 mm nominal pipe diameter. The errors found at the two smaller
pipes where within the uncertainty estimate of the test setup. At the 300 mm pipe
the error was 1.3 % while the estimated expanded uncertainty of the test setup was
0.93 %. The reason for this error was that the inflow conditions were not quite ideal.
The repeatability of the calibration method with varying transducer specimen was
verified at 20 specimens of transducers of the same type and taken from two differ-
ent lots. It had been shown that the calibration reduced the difference between the
two lots significantly. The calibration showed a difference of 1.06 % between the two
lots. After the calibration, the difference between the errors of the two lots shown in
the flow tests, was reduced to 0.18 %.
15
10 NOTATION
DN Nominal pipe diameter

HTF Hydrodynamic Test Field (PTB’s high-accuracy water flow
standard facility)
LDA Laser Doppler Anemometry
PTB Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt
A [m²] Cross sectional area of the pipe
ALDA [m²] Cross sectional area of the LDA glass pipe
D, d [m] Diameter
K Re [-] Fluid mechanic calibration factor
K a [-] Acoustic calibration factor
L, l [m] Length
R, r [m] Radius
Re [-] Reynolds number
t [s] time
T [°C] Temperature
∆t [s] Time difference
t fl [s] Fluid transit time
u [%] Uncertainty
U [%] Expanded uncertainty
v [m/s] flow velocity
v A [m/s] Mean flow velocity
vl [m/s] Average path velocity
V [m³/h] Flow rate
V [m³/h]
REF Reference flow rate
∆x [m] Local displacement
11 REFERENCES
[1] ISO 12242:2012, Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits — Ultrasonic

transit-time meters for liquid
[2] Büker, O.: Untersuchung zur Darstellung und Weitergabe der Skala „Volumen
von Wasser“ mithilfe laseroptischer und konventioneller Messverfahren. Dis-
sertation, Berlin 2010
[3] Lederer, T.; Wendt, G.; Mathies , N.; Többen, H.; Müller, U.; Dues, M.: Ver-
fahren zur Messung von Geschwindigkeitensverteilungen eines durch einen
Rohrquerschnitt strömenden Fluides und Messanordnung zur Durchführung
des Verfahrens. Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt, DE 10 2006 039 489 B3,
31. Januar 2008.
[4] Müller, U.; Adunka, F.; Dues, M.; Guntermann, P.; Rose, J.; Lederer, Th.:
Möglichkeiten zur Vor-Ort-Überprüfung von großen Durchflusssensoren. In
EuroHeat&Power Jg. 40 (2011), H.6, S. 48-52.
16
[5] Müller, U.; Dues, M.; Baumann, H.: Vollflächige Erfassung von ungestörten
und gestörten Geschwindigkeitensverteilungen in Rohrleitungen mittels der
Laser-Doppler-Anemometrie. In Technischs Messen 74 (2007), H.6, S.
[6] Müller, U.: Richtlinie zur strömungstechnischen Validierung von Kalibrier-

Prüfständen im Rahmen der EN 1434. Hrsg. von AG Laseroptische Strö-
mungsmesstechnik, Berlin 2009.
[7] Müller, U.; Dues, M.; Baumann, H.: Vollflächige Erfassung von ungestörten
und gestörten Geschwindigkeitensverteilungen in Rohrleitungen mittels der
Laser-Doppler-Anemometrie. In Technischs Messen 74 (2007), H.6, S. 343.
[8] ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008, Uncertainty of measurement — Part 3: Guide to

the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM:1995)
[9] Müller, U.: Messunsicherheitsbudget für LDV-Pfadmessung im ZIM-Projekt

Flexim GmbH – PTB Braunschweig. Optolution Messtechnik GmbH, Reinach
2012
[10] Calibration Certificate for the Reference of the Aperture Calibration System,
Flexim GmbH, Technical information.
17
View publication stats

A New Calibration Method For Ultrasonic Clamp-On Flowmeters IFMC Coventry 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

A New Calibration Method For Ultrasonic Clamp-On Flowmeters IFMC Coventry 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

A New Calibration Method for Ultrasonic Clamp-on Flowmeters

Conference Paper · July 2015

Bernhard Funck Rainer Engel

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A New Calibration Method for Ultrasonic

2 THE MEASUREMENT PRINCIPLE

Figure 1 Calibration factors

3 THE NEW CALIBRATION METHOD

Figure 2 a) Sound path with and without flow

4 QUANTIFICATION OF THE TRANSFERABILITY OF THE NEW CALIBRA-

1. Verifying the reproducibility of the calibration with various transducer speci-

Thus the fluid mechanical calibration factor K Re results to:

5.2 Reproducibility with Varying Application Conditions

6.2 Location of Flow Measurement

Table 1 Range of parameter variations

Nominal pipe diameter 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm

Transducer frequency 2 MHz, 4 MHz 2 MHz, 4 MHz 1 MHz, 2 MHz

Fluid temperature 10°C … 35°C

Fluid point velocity 0.5 m/s … 5 m/s

Reynolds number (Re) 30E+03 … 2.5E+06

Characteristics of flow profile Non-disturbed

Figure 3 Cut-away view of PTB’s Hydrodynamic Test Field (HTF)

Installation area for the transducers >3D

Inlet flow section 40D Measurement section 4 m Outlet 10D

LDA chamber LDA chamber

Figure 4 Measurement pipe section

6.3 LDA Path Velocity Measurement

Figure 5 Principle of LDA measurement

6.4 Ultrasonic Transducers

Table 2 Transducer selection for the tests

Nominal diameter 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm

Transducer type FSP FSQ FSP FSQ FSP FSM

6.5 Geometry of the Measuring Pipe

Figure 6 Setup with LDA chamber and 2 different transducer types,

6.6 Geometry of the LDA Glass Pipe

Table 3 Geometrical parameter of the LDA glass pipe

Type 50 mm 100 mm 300 mm

Uncertainty of inner diameter +/- 0.05 mm +/- 0.05 mm +/- 0.1 mm

6.7 Inflow Conditions

K Re Inlet Outlet Difference

Path 1 -45° 0,924 0,9353 -1,248 %

K Re Inlet Outlet Difference

Path 1 -45° 0,950 0,943 0,789 %

K Re Inlet Outlet Difference

Path 1 -45° 0,934 0,938 -0,342 %

7 MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY OF THE TRANSFERABILITY

This results in the following relative uncertainty:

= + ur2_ transm (15)

The relative uncertainty of A thus is

The assumption Do  w yields:

The total uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability thus is:

u ( ∆V ) u (VREF ) u ( v A _ LDA ) u ( vl _ LDA )

Table 7 Uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability,

Table 8 Uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability,

Table 9 Uncertainty of the measurement of the transferability,

Figure 9 Distribution of the acoustical calibration factor over measurement error

Table 10 Reproducibility with varying transducer specimen

8.2 Reproducibility with Varying Application Conditions

Figure 10 DN 50: Average error over all Reynolds numbers

Figure 11 DN 100. Average error over all Reynolds numbers