Ask the Experts
Measuring High and
Low Flows
How does one select flowmeters to measure high and
low flows?
Minimizing the risk associated with making a flow mea-
surement is often the highest priority when process condi-
tions are uncertain. Using meters that provide flexibility
after installation, such as vortex meters with integral reduc-
ing flanges for low flows and averaging pitot tubes for high
flows, can prevent many headaches after installation.
But anybody who says that there is one flowmeter that’s
going to do the job in every situation has only one flowmeter
to sell. Each application is unique, and needs to be evaluated
to determine which meter fits best. The selection process
should begin with the question: Why is this flow measure-
ment being made? This naturally leads to questions of per-
formance and price. Performance brings up many questions,
such as: Should volume or mass be measured? What are the
environmental considerations? How does the measurement
contribute to overall system performance? and What kind of
accuracy, repeatability and response are needed? Even these
questions are not as simple as they appear.
They need to be reframed as real selection criteria in
terms of installed performance, installed cost and overall
cost of ownership. For example, installed performance
includes things such as pipe configuration, ambient-temper-
ature effects and calibration frequency, which all can bear
on how the meter performs when it is installed in a real-life
process. At the end of the day, the specification on a
flowmeter vendor’s data sheet probably means very little.
Installed cost goes beyond the flowmeter’s price tag to
include things such as installation labor, engineering time
and how many vendors are needed to get a complete
flowmeter installation.
Best practices
However, there are some best practices that aid in selec-
tion. These include:
1. Measure mass flow in gases and steam. This reduces
the process variability and leads to consistent quality in
applications that require mass balancing, for example. This
best practice talks to the performance part of meter selection.
2. Eliminate impulse lines. Doing this dramatically
reduces both installed and maintenance costs.
3. Minimize permanent pressure loss. This reduces over-
all lifetime operating costs in the form of lessened overall
energy consumption.
4. Select inline meters for small lines and insertion
meters for large lines to reduce the overall installed cost of
the flowmeter.
5. Eliminate mechanical meters to reduce maintenance
costs. Moving parts in mechanical meters need regular
maintenance and are unreliable due to the wear of internal
parts. Accuracy can also degrade over time.
22 www.cepmagazine.org April 2003 CEP
Tom Johnson (left) is the vortex and magmeter Americas marketing manager
for the Rosemount Div. of Emerson Process Management (Fax: (952) 949-5114;
E-mail: Tom-Flow.Johnson@EmersonProcess.com). He has 16 years of experi-
ence with flow products in positions of electrical design, development and
manufacturing, as well as in product and area marketing.
Joel Lemke (right) is manager of differential-pressure flow applications for the
Rosemount Div. of Emerson Process Management (Fax: (952) 949-5114; E-mail:
Joel.Lemke@EmersonProcess.com). He has 15 years of experience in process
measurement technology, including work in the design, manufacture and appli-
cation of differential-pressure and vortex flowmeters. Lemke holds a bachelor’s
degree in mechanical engineering from the Univ. of Minnesota.
6. Use device diagnostics to enable predictive mainte-
nance. Device diagnostics that indicate process and meter
health can eliminate the wasteful cycle of reactive or pre-
ventive maintenance of flowmeters.
Here is an example of how to apply best practice No. 4
— using inline vs. insertion meter — to the selection of
meters for high and low flows. Inline meters are those that
fit between two flanges, and include vortex, magnetic and
orifice devices. Insertion meters are installed through a hole
drilled into the pipe wall and do not require flanges.
Averaging pitot tubes and insertion turbine meters are
examples. The driver behind this practice is the installed
cost of the meter. As the line size increases, both material
and installation labor costs increase.
For example, in a 6-in. compressed-air line, the total
installed cost of an averaging pitot tube flowmeter would be
about $3,500*, whereas inline meters would be above
$4,000*. In this case, insertion technology can offer substan-
tial savings. With recent improvements in this technology,
the accuracy, turndown and repeatability are better than ever,
as well. In small line sizes, such as a 1-in. process line, sev-
eral inline technologies are available. Among these, magnet-
ic, vortex or integral orifice meters can all be used with an
installed cost of around $2,600*. The specific process will
dictate which technology would be most appropriate. An
example of installed cost improvements in small line sizes is
the introduction of vortex meters with built-in reducing
flanges. This option can reduce the installed cost of a such a
meter by $400, while improving its ability to read low flows.
The overall message is to ensure that decisions are based
on what really matters to the overall plant efficiency, rather
than just applying simplified selection criteria, such as refer-
ence accuracy or a meter’s price tag. Another key point is to
work with vendors that offer a range of flowmeters, so that
the customer is not stuck with a company that tries to force-fit
the only meter it has into every application. The vendor that
is chosen should be committed to the continuous improve-
ment of its flowmeters, not just concerning accuracy, but also
based on the overall value for the investment that is made.
* “Process Plant Construction Estimating Standards,” Mechanical and
Electrical, Vol. 3, Richardson Engineering Services, Mesa, AZ (June 1990).