This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

October 1998

Proving Coriolis Flowmeters

Copyright ©1998, Micro Motion, Inc. All rights reserved. Micro Motion, ELITE and ProLink are registered trademarks, and ALTUS is a trademark of Micro Motion, Inc., Boulder, Colorado. Rosemount and SMART FAMILY are registered trademarks of Rosemount, Inc., Eden Prairie, Minnesota. HART is a registered trademark of the HART Communication Foundation, Austin, Texas. Modbus is a registered trademark of Modicon, Inc., North Andover, Massachusetts. Microsoft and Windows are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corp., Redmond, Washington. Intel is a registered trademark of Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, California. Hastelloy is a registered trademark of Haynes International, Inc., Kokomo Indiana. Minigrabber is a registered trademark of ITT Corp., New York, New York.

Foreward

This manual was published primarily to support the application of Micro Motion Coriolis flowmeters used in custody transfer service, where the meters are proved by common proving methods. This is a comprehensive manual, in that it can be used for training those people who have minimal knowledge of Coriolis meters, and those people who know very little about proving techniques in general. For those experienced with the application of Coriolis flowmeters, or those experienced at proving other types of flowmeters, the manual has been designed in brief sections that can be referred to quickly and completely. It is not necessary to read this entire book to prove a meter. For example: If an experienced, conventional prover operator wants to prove a Micro Motion meter for the first time, he can turn to Section 8.3 and use the proving form in Appendix A. If an instrumentation engineer is designing a Coriolis meter run, he can refer to the information in Chapters 5 and 6. No need to read the entire manual. It is hoped that this proving manual will help anyone who is involved in the application of Micro Motion meters that are being proved. For further assistance, please call the Micro Motion Customer Service Department: • In the U.S.A., phone 1-800-522-MASS (1-800-522-6277) • Outside the U.S.A., phone 303-530-8400 • In Europe, phone +31 (0) 318 549 443 • In Asia, phone 65-770-8155

.

. . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer. . . . . Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Terminology and Mathematical Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers . . . . . . . . . . . . xv 1 7 15 33 37 43 59 67 119 131 139 163 255 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters i . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals. . . . . . . . Appendixes . . . . . . . . Proving Instrumentation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Proving Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Rate Proving Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement. . . . .1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2. Meter Configured For Mass Measurement . . Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Quality Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using a Density Meter at the Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 17 18 20 22 22 25 27 29 30 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Is the Outcome of Proving?. . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 14 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Proving. . . . .Contents Terminology and Mathematical Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Why Is Proving Performed? . . . Maximum Volume Proving Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . .4 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend Charts . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pay and Check Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Mass Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . Varying Process Conditions . . . . . Environmental Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Volume Proving Requirements . . xix 1 3 2 General Proving Concepts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 What Is Proving Versus Calibration? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 ii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . When Do You Need To Prove a Coriolis Meter? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Custody Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . Increasing the Time Between Provings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Analog Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liquid Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 37 39 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 5. . .3 6. . . . . . . . . . . .1 5. . . . . . . . . Analog Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the RS-485 Output . . . . .3 5. . 6. . . . . Sensor Flow Tube Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional Flow Measurement Information . . . . . . . . . . Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . .5 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters iii . . . . . . . . Interface to Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 46 47 47 47 48 49 49 49 52 53 53 53 54 56 56 57 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimizing External Influences on the Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Response Time/Damping . . . . . Location of Proving Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low-Flow Cutoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vertical Pipeline . . . . . .5 6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals. . . . . . K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Digital Information . . . . Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations . . . . . . 5. . . . . . .Contents 4 5 Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer. . Gas Measurement . . . . . . . . . .2 Sensor Mounting . . . . . . . . . . .4 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Bell 202 Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . Meter Zero . . . . . . . Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output . . . Wiring to Allow Field-Access to Meter Information . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Proving Computer . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Test Batches . Volumetric Tank Proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . Density Proving Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Test Batches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . Density Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 8 Flow Rate Proving Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Batch Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Single-Channel Proving Counters. . . . . . . Pulse Counting Device. . . . . . Required Equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . .6 7. . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 iv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Averaging Device . .1 Gravimetric Tank Proving . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment. . . . . 59 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 64 65 65 7. . . . . . .5 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency Totalizers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Batch Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . .1 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents 7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 7. . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . Dual-Channel Proving Counters . . . . . . . . . 67 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 77 78 78 79 79 80 82 83 83 83 84 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .5 8. . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Master Meters . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . .Contents 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Proving Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . Precautions . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Passes/Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . 84 85 85 86 89 90 90 90 90 91 94 94 95 98 100 101 103 103 104 104 104 105 106 107 108 110 111 111 111 111 111 113 113 114 117 117 117 118 118 8. . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Meters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters v . . . . . . . . . . .3 Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover Uncertainty. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions. . . . . Meter Recommendations. . . .Contents 9 Proving Calculations Summary . . . . . . . . . .4 Volume Meter Factor . . .1 Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . .0 or Higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . 119 9. . . . . . . . Sensor Installation . . 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 9. . . . . . . . . Transmitter Outputs and Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Uncertainty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3.2 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility . . . . . . . . . .5 9. . . . . . . .3 9. . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . .7 10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting . . . . . . .1 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 . . 131 10. . . . . . . . . . . Proving Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 133 133 134 134 135 135 136 vi Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . .2 Proving Troubleshooting .6 9. . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poor Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . Density Proving Procedure . . . . . . . Density Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Troubleshooting . . . . .5 Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting . Density Factor Reproducibility/Trend Charting . . . Applying the Density Factor to Correct the Coriolis Meter Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 141 142 143 143 144 146 148 151 154 155 158 158 159 159 160 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters vii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents 11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Overview . . . . . .4 Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density Proving Installations. .3 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Density Output Signals Digital Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . 11. . . . . . . .2 Recommended Meters for Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Proving Equipment . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Forms for Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed . . . . . . . . . . Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Appendixes A B C D E F G H I J Proving Forms for Volume Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Charts . Volume Measurement. . . . Mass Flow Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Forms for Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment Manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run . . . . . . . . 163 173 183 189 195 205 223 239 245 251 viii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass proving using Coriolis density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small volume prover. . . . . . . . . Series density proving installation . . . . . . . . Average meter factors for multiple proving runs . . RFT9739 standard frequency schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 13 19 21 23 25 28 31 39 41 50 50 50 51 55 57 57 72 72 76 77 78 79 85 92 93 102 105 112 127 148 149 150 157 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters ix . . . . . Conventional pipe prover . Components of a Coriolis sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass proving with a density meter . . . . . . . . . Volumetric proving against a storage tank . Outlet piping design for filling tank provers . . . . . . . . . . Double-chronometry pulse interpolation . . . Coriolis master meter proving. . . . . . . . . . Typical density proving report . . . Typical sensor installation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum mass proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample proving trend chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer standard proving configuration. . . . . . . . . . Parallel density proving installation . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis meter response during proving . . . . . . . Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices . . .Contents Figures Figure 1-1 Figure 1-2 Figure 2-1 Figure 3-1 Figure 3-2 Figure 3-3 Figure 3-4 Figure 3-5 Figure 3-6 Figure 5-1 Figure 5-2 Figure 6-1a Figure 6-1b Figure 6-1c Figure 6-2 Figure 6-3 Figure 6-4a Figure 6-4b Figure 8-1a Figure 8-1b Figure 8-2 Figure 8-3 Figure 8-4 Figure 8-5 Figure 8-6 Figure 8-7 Figure 8-8 Figure 8-9 Figure 8-10 Figure 8-11 Figure 9-1 Figure 11-1 Figure 11-2 Figure 11-3 Figure 11-4 Components of a Coriolis meter . . . . . Gravimetric proving with tanker truck . . . . . . . . . Double-walled vacuum-sphere pycnometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic . . Gravimetric proving with weigh tank. Volumetric tank proving . . Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down . . . . . . Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter . . . . . RFT9739 rack-mount local access terminals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic . . . . RFT9739 field-mount local access terminals. . . . . . . . . . Recommended Coriolis sensor orientation . . . Meter Factor trend chart . .

. . . . . . . . . 128 x Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . 54 Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Trend Chart data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Tables Table 6-1 Table 8-1 Table 8-2 Table 8-3 Table 8-4 Table 8-5 Table 9-1 Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies . 99 Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . 73 Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . 101 Repeatability versus number of passes per run . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . Simplified model of an operating Coriolis sensor . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications. . . . Pressure effect on density measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mounting for sensor vibration isolation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on mass flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Figures in Appendices Figure F-1 Figure F-2 Figure F-3 Figure F-4 Figure F-5 Figure F-6a Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . . . Mounting for sensor vibration isolation. . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 208 209 211 212 213 214 215 216 219 225 227 228 229 Figure F-6b Figure F-7 Figure F-8 Figure F-9 Figure G-1 Figure G-2 Figure G-3 Figure G-4 Figure G-5a 230 231 232 234 236 242 242 242 247 Figure G-5b Figure G-6 Figure G-7 Figure G-8 Figure H-1 Figure H-2 Figure H-3 Figure I-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters xi . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 172 182 182 187 210 217 219 230 233 234 237 248 xii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero uncertainty specifications . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Tables in Appendices Table A-1 Table A-2 Table B-1 Table B-2 Table C-1 Table F-1 Table F-2 Table F-3 Table G-1 Table G-2 Table G-3 Table G-4 Table I-1 Proving conversion factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density conversion factors . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for flow . . . . . . . Proving conversion factors . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FD and K3 values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of passes per run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of sound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Prover Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report . . . . Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions. . . Meter Factor Chart . . . . . . Small Volume Prover . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents Forms and Charts Form A-1 Form A-2 Form A-3 Form A-4 Form A-5 Form A-6 Form B-1 Form B-2 Form B-3 Form B-4 Form B-5 Form B-6 Form C-1 Form C-2 Form D-1 Form D-2 Form E-1 Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Master Meter . Density Factor Chart . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Master Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero Chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass. . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Gravimetric Tank Prover . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 167 168 169 170 171 176 177 178 179 180 181 186 187 192 193 204 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters xiii . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

xiv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

Nominal full-scale flow — The nominal flow rating of the meter. To have a functional Coriolis flowmeter. Meter factor — A number obtained by dividing the actual quantity of fluid passed through the meter (as determined from the prover) by the quantity registered by the meter. This value is defined by the meter manufacturer. through which the process fluid flows. RTD — Resistance temperature detector. totalization. page 3. used to vibrate the sensor flow tubes. See Figure 1-1. Sensor — The mechanical component of a Coriolis meter.Terminology and Mathematical Variables The following terms and mathematical variables are used throughout this document. initially determined during factory calibration. The sensor consists of the components shown in Figure 1-2. which are vibrated using the driver. The K-factor is a value that is divided into the pulses output from the meter. to determine the total mass or gross volume measured by the Coriolis meter. This value is defined by the meter manufacturer. The calibration factor resides in the transmitter. Meter or flowmeter — Combination of the mechanical flow sensor and the electronics transmitter. used to measure the effect of the Coriolis force on the vibrating sensor flow tubes and to monitor tube vibration. Pickoffs or pickoff coils — Coil and magnet assembly. K-factor or pulse scaling factor — Pulses per unit mass (volume). page 4 Sensor flow tubes — Tube or tubes. Minimum full-scale flow — The minimum flow rate that enables the meter to produce the maximum analog output of 20 mA. Coriolis Meter Terms Driver or drive coil — Coil and magnet assembly. which is used to convert sensor pickoff signals to a mass flow rate. or display of the meter’s output information. is measured to determine the mass flow rate of the fluid. used to compensate the meter measurement for the effect of temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters xv . Maximum operating flow rate — The maximum flow rate at which the meter is to be used. an adjustable value that is configured into the transmitter by the manufacturer or a user. Flow calibration factor — A coefficient. This value is defined by the meter user. This value is defined by the meter manufacturer. The calibration factor usually is not adjusted after the initial factory calibration. which is induced by the flowing fluid. both components are required. Process connections — Flanges or fittings that are used to connect the sensor to the process piping. Small-scale distortion of the tubes caused by the Coriolis force. through which the process fluid flows. Maximum full-scale flow — The maximum flow rating of the meter. Peripheral device — An additional electronic instrument used for supplementary computations.

The source of this uncertainty is limitations in the transmitter’s ability to sample and measure the small signal levels from the pickoffs. Stored zero — The zero value stored in the transmitter. Transmitter — The electronics assembly that powers the driver and processes the signals from the sensor pickoffs to provide meaningful mass flow and density output. Calibration — The process of using a reference standard to determine a calibration factor.Terminology and Mathematical Variables Proving Terms Sensor case — The housing that surrounds the sensor flow tubes to prevent them from being damaged and to keep potential environmental contamination from the sensor pickoffs. Proving Terms Base prover volume — The volume of the prover corrected to standard conditions of 60°F and 14. between its detector switches. determined when the meter is zeroed. Optional devices such as burst disks. (The zeroing operation should not be confused with resetting the totalizer). to a reference of known quantity. xvi Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . This is the value that represents the time difference between the right and left sensor pickoff signals when there is no flow through the sensor. Waterdraw — The process of calibrating a volumetric proving device against a NISTcertified volumetric field-standard test measure. This process is normally conducted in the field. This process is normally conducted by the meter manufacturer. at operating conditions. Zeroing — A procedure to determine a zero value that represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs at zero flow. Proving — The process of comparing the indicated quantity that passes through a meter under test. which can be found in the sensor specifications. Proving pass — The operation of the prover displacer traversing the calibrated volume of the prover. in order to establish a meter factor that equates the two quantities. The zero value is used by the transmitter to calculate flow rate. Zero offset — The difference between the true zero value and the stored zero value. Prover prerun — The time between launching the piston or ball and the start of pulse accumulation from the meter.73 psia or 15°C and 101 kPa. drains and vents can be supplied to accommodate hazardous area installations. Proving run — A complete proving cycle. True zero — The true zero value of the meter under the current process conditions. caused by external influences such as changes in temperature or mounting conditions. Zero stability or zero uncertainty — A number that represents the statistical variation in the stored zero value. Each sensor size and model has a unique zero stability value. Calibration adjusts the output of the meter to bring it to a value which is within the specified accuracy tolerance. which can consist of one or more proving passes. obtained from multiple meter zeroings.

73 psia or 15°C and 101 kPa). Pycnometer — A vessel of known volume and mass. Mathematical Terms ρp — Fluid density at flowing conditions at the prover ρm — Fluid density at flowing conditions at the meter BPV — Base prover volume Ctsp — Correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover Cpsp — Correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover Ctlp — Correction for thermal expansion of process fluid at the prover Cplp — Correction for pressure effect on process fluid at the prover Ctlm — Correction for thermal expansion of process fluid at the meter Cplm — Correction for pressure effect on process fluid at the meter DF — Density factor MFm — Meter factor when the meter is configured to indicate mass MFv — Meter factor when the meter is configured to indicate volume Pm — Fluid pressure at the meter Pp — Fluid pressure at the prover Tm — Fluid temperature at the meter Tp — Fluid temperature at the prover Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters xvii .Terminology and Mathematical Variables Mathematical Terms Density Terms Base density — The density of the liquid at the base conditions (typically at 60°F and 14. Density factor — A number obtained by dividing the actual density of the fluid measured by a density reference (typically a pycnometer). Flowing density — The density of the liquid at actual flowing temperature and pressure. by the density registered by the meter. which is filled with fluid and weighed to determine the density of the fluid.

xviii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . .1 Introduction 1. . . . . Components of a Coriolis meter . . . . . 3 3 4 Figure 1-1 Figure 1-2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 1 . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis sensor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 3 . A Coriolis meter consists of a mechanical sensor and an electronic transmitter. due to fluid compression. The sensor’s primary measurement components are vibrating flow tubes and flow detectors (pickoffs). If desired.1 Coriolis Meters A unique feature of Coriolis meters is that they measure mass flow rate directly. as shown in Figure 1-1. and pressure. which are illustrated in Figure 1-2. which is independent of the mass flow measurement. is also obtained from the vibrating flow tube. due to thermal expansion. Components of a Coriolis meter. The pickoffs provide a signal from which the mass flow rate can be determined.1 Introduction 1. The volume of a fluid will change with varying temperature. A density measurement. the Figure 1-1. Shown are an ELITE® CMF200 sensor and RFT9739 field-mount transmitter in an explosion-proof housing. The advantage of measuring mass is that mass is unaffected by changes in process conditions. The mass flow rate measurement is not calculated from volume and density measurements.

Shown is an ELITE® CMF300 sensor. then the fluid density must be determined to convert the prover volume measurement to mass units. they are ideally suited to products that are accounted for on a mass basis. and there is always uncertainty as to whether the sample is representative of the actual fluid stream.15% Temperature to ±1°C computer determines the mass from the measured volume and density.1% Density to ±0. reducing the requirements for installing and maintaining multiple instruments. to allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. it is proved just like any volumetric meter would be proved. such as LPG. If the Coriolis meter is configured for volumetric flow rate measurement. if the meter is being used to measure mass. The flow 4 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Coriolis meters are capable of measuring flow in either the forward or reverse direction. There are timing considerations associated with proving a Coriolis meter that can result Because Coriolis meters measure mass flow rate directly. and a flow computer.0005 g/cc Volumetric flow rate to ±0. Components of a Coriolis sensor. In addition. The sensors have no rotating parts such as bearings or gears. Another concern is the time required for performing a proving run.1 Introduction Figure 1-2. a density meter. • The meters can be significantly overranged without causing damage to the sensor. strainers are optional. A Coriolis meter replaces these three pieces of equipment. Coriolis meters have inherent features that are well suited to custody transfer measurement. Sampling systems are prone to maintenance problems. which provides the following advantages: • Low maintenance. However. because there are no parts that wear with time. • Solids can flow through the sensor without damage. Traditionally. Pickoff coil and magnet Resistance temperature detector (RTD) Flow tubes Pickoff coil and magnet Drive coil and magnet Coriolis meter mass flow and density measurements can be used to calculate the volumetric flow rate of the fluid. as is common with turbine meters. • Vapor/gas in the process fluid will not cause damage due to overspin. ethylene. Because a Coriolis meter measures the entire process fluid stream. Custody transfer measurement typically requires the meter accuracy to be proved in the field. which are used to verify a meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement. Coriolis meters provide a multivariable measurement: • • • • Mass flow rate to ±0. NGL. which is particularly advantageous in loading/unloading applications. and CO2. the need for a sampling system for density measurement is eliminated. mass measurement is achieved indirectly by using a volumetric meter. Commonly available field proving devices are volume references.

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 5 . This document focuses on proving for custody transfer.Introduction 1 in poor results if the proving time is too short. Using a prover that is too small for the Coriolis meter will affect the accuracy and repeatability of the proving results. higher flow rates will result in shorter proving times. Because the prover volume is fixed. Significant details about the operation of Coriolis meters are included. the primary focus is flow rate proving. The purpose of this document is to discuss the methods available for proving. and to provide guidelines to help ensure that the proving results are reliable. Both flow rate and density proving will be discussed. to enhance the understanding of technical issues that may arise during meter proving. However. but the principles presented are applicable to any type of proving application.

6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . . . .2 General Proving Concepts 2. . . . . . . . . Quality Audit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Figure 2-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample proving trend chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pay and Check Meters . . . . . . . . . Increasing the Time Between Provings. . . . When Do You Need To Prove a Coriolis Meter? . . . 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 14 13 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environmental Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Custody Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Varying Process Conditions . . . . . .1 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2. . . Trend Charts . . . . . What Is the Outcome of Proving? . . . . . . . . Why Is Proving Performed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 What Is Proving Versus Calibration? . . . .

8 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

the meter’s calibration factors are determined. The correction factor is multiplied by the reading from the meter to offset the meter measurement. and (2) contract. The meter is proved to ensure product inventory accounting is of the highest accuracy. Proving is usually performed under one set of conditions. Proving differs from calibration in that it is performed in the field under operating conditions. based on ISO 5168. Every Micro Motion® meter is calibrated in a gravimetric calibration lab to determine the meter’s fundamental mass flow calibration factor.05%.2 General Proving Concepts 2. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 9 . The density calibration is performed using two fluids — air and water. and to verify that meter accuracy is within specification over a range of flow rates. which falls under government Weights and Measures requirements. The meter measurement being proved can be flow rate or density. Verification is necessary to determine whether variations in fluid properties and process conditions cause a shift in the meter’s calibration under actual operating conditions. a meter correction factor is determined. The weigh-scale readings are corrected for buoyancy effect. Meter proving is generally conducted for one of three reasons: • Custody transfer • Quality audit • Environmental audit Custody Transfer There are two types of custody transfer measurement: (1) legal. The proving process allows the user to correct the reading from the meter to provide the true quantity of fluid that went through the meter. The Micro Motion calibration lab employs weigh scales whose calibration is traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). to determine if different meter factors are needed for each set of conditions. This is accomplished by comparing the reading from the meter to a calibrated reference device. the density calibration factors for the meter are also determined. and should be conducted when the operating conditions are most representative of the typical operating conditions. densities. Custody transfer flow measurements are performed for accounting of product quantities in order to establish monetary value of deliveries between sellers and buyers. If the operating conditions vary significantly during operation. During the flow calibration procedure. 2. or temperatures. When a meter is proved in the field. The calibration lab employs water as the flowing medium. under which a contractual agreement between a buyer and seller specifies requirements. When a calibration is performed.1 What Is Proving Versus Calibration? Calibration is typically performed in a laboratory at several different flow rates. it is beneficial to prove the meter under the different operating conditions.2 Why Is Proving Performed? The need for proving arises because operating conditions differ significantly from the conditions under which the meter is calibrated. The calculated uncertainty of the calibration facility is better than ±0.

and to recalibrate if it is out of specification. Master meter verification methods are also acceptable. Density proving is covered in Section 11. For quality and environmental audits. and to provide evidence that meter verification is being conducted on a regularly scheduled basis. The remaining discussion. OSHA. compared to a known reference. field proving is not specifically required. the meter can be removed and tested in a separate calibration facility or be sent out for reverification by the manufacturer. it is essential to show that a plan is in place for routinely verifying equipment accuracy. Quality Audit A routine meter verification plan should be established to comply with ISO 9000 quality requirements. The basic calculation that applies to all provings. The meter’s flow measurement is multiplied by the meter factor to provide the correct inventory. Therefore.0000 indicates that the meter is over-registering (reading high). Therefore. is described by Equation 2-1. The discussion thus far has been general. A meter factor less than 1. As part of this environmental accounting. 2. presented in Sections 3 through 10. to ensure product quality remains consistent. A more flexible meter verification plan can be used. so that there is no loss of product along the way. to ensure material balances in manufacturing and pipeline transfers are correct. 2-1) Prover Value Meter Correction Factor = -----------------------------------------Meter Reading • A decision can be made whether to return equipment to the manufacturer for checkup/recalibration.2 General Proving Concepts What Is the Outcome of Proving? Proving must be performed under actual operating conditions. The most common result of proving is to use a calculated meter factor to correct the meter’s flow rate indication. If a meter is used for controlling the addition of various fluid components to make a final product.3 What Is the Outcome of Proving? The objective of proving a meter is to determine what the meter reading is. The primary purpose of such an audit is to verify that transferred material is accounted for. meter performance must be repeatable to ensure product quality does not decline. • Proving results can be used to determine new meter calibration factors. 10 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . applies only to flow rate proving. The meter correction factor defined in Equation 2-1 is commonly referred to as a meter factor. Because environmental regulation requirements are escalating. or other governing body. Environmental Audit An environmental audit might be required by the EPA.0000 indicates that the meter is under-registering (reading low). and can be applied to proving either the meter’s flow rate or density measurement. (Eq. a meter factor greater than 1. The objective is to verify the meter is performing within specification. it is more important today than ever to have a sufficient number of measurement points to provide evidence that no environmental violations have occurred at a site. A field reference device is used to prove the meter. whether the measurement being proved is flow or density. The information obtained from proving can be used in a number of ways: • The meter reading can be multiplied by the meter factor to obtain the correct measurement.

a zero offset would result in different meter factors for the forward and reverse directions. As required by the contract or proving schedule. the meter calibration factor does not change between forward and reverse flow. to provide data on their particular applications. page 195. When a change in flow rate occurs. pressure. and the proving frequency determined for these meters can be applied to all meters on similar service. then more frequent proving is appropriate. 2. When the sensor is returned to service after having been removed from the process pipeline. the proving frequency can be reduced. In lieu of any test data. 2. Proving the meter over a range of flow rates might be necessary to determine acceptable flow rate tolerances. Also. 1. The following list details all of the conditions under which a meter might need to be proved. When there is a significant change in the system temperature. (Characterizing the meter’s zero can preclude having to prove when the meter is zeroed. provings should be performed to establish meter factors for each direction. 9. page 195.5 How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? Typically.) 8. Refer to Appendix E. the real determinant should be the performance of the meter from one proving to the next. One way to determine the frequency of proving is to collect proving data on an initial group of meters. When the meter is initially brought into service. the level of proving can be decreased. However. Refer to Appendix E. However.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 2. It is generally recommended that new users who have little experience with Coriolis meters should prove their first meters at least monthly. Anytime the accuracy of a meter is questioned by either party involved in the custody transfer. page 205. Although.) Because the objective of proving is to obtain the most accurate product accounting that is possible. Proving the meter more frequently after the meter is initially installed will speed up the process of determining the required meter proving frequency. 7. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 11 .4 When Do You Need To Prove a Coriolis Meter? For custody transfer measurement it is common practice to prove the meter when it is first put into service. Conversely. If the meter is being used to measure bidirectional flow (forward and reverse flow). if the meter factor changes each time the meter is proved. or density. if the change might cause the meter to exceed the accuracy limits set forth in the contract. When the meter is rezeroed. 3. that would affect meter accuracy. the proving contract specifies how often proving must be performed. more provings might be required for a new installation. for a discussion on meter zeroing. the meter should be reproved if the flow rate varies significantly from the normal operating flow rate. (Refer to Appendix F. 6. 4. When the sensor or transmitter is replaced. As confidence in the meter performance becomes established. If there is little or no change in meter factor between provings. these are not requirements. or anytime the sensor mounting conditions are changed. and on a regularly scheduled basis thereafter. proving is typically performed anytime the meter is subjected to changes in conditions which might cause a change in measurement accuracy. 5.

After the user has demonstrated the required proving frequency on an initial group of meters. it is useful to perform several provings across the entire operating range. is included on page 192. The frequency of proving will also depend on contract requirements. It is desirable to record the parameters listed below directly on the trend chart. Figure 2-1 shows an example of a meter trend chart. However.6. semiannually or annually. Trend charts are also an excellent means of tracking variations in the meter’s zero offset. Semiannual or annual provings might be sufficient for ISO 9000 certification.2 General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? Trend Charts A trend chart of meter factor and meter repeatability should be developed. for a discussion on determining meter zeroing requirements. all subsequent meters that are used on similar applications can have this proving frequency applied without having to repeat the entire confidence determination for every new meter. which may be reproduced. A blank trend chart. varying composition and viscosity Trend charts can be used to collect this type of information. Varying Process Conditions If the meter will be operated over a range of process conditions. Additional information on using trend charts is presented in Section 9. It is never recommended to go any longer than one year between meter provings. for each proving.25% from one proving to the next. Increasing the Time Between Provings After sufficient data is accumulated. to determine whether using a single meter factor will suffice for all operating conditions. Refer to Appendix E. but might not be acceptable for custody transfer measurement. it might be acceptable to increase the time between provings — quarterly. The ability to go to longer times between provings depends on collecting sufficient data to convince the user of meter factor stability. which could be used for tracking meter performance. and establishing requirements for rezeroing the meter. page 195. page 126. to gain an understanding of any influences on the meter. the actual requirement is either specified in the contract or required by Weights and Measures authorities. • • • • • • • • • • • • Date Name of proving company Flow rate Temperature at meter Pressure at meter Density at meter Ambient temperature Whether the meter was zeroed or not Prover base volume Temperature at prover Pressure at prover Density at prover not be constant from one day to the next it is beneficial to characterize the influence of the following parameters on the meter factor: • • • • Flow range Temperature range Pressure range Different products. If the operating conditions will 12 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . or whether multiple meter factors are necessary for different operating conditions. Corrosive or erosive process fluids warrant more frequent proving. It is common practice that the meter factor vary by no more than ±0.

0075 1.05% • 0. Sample proving trend chart.6175 4/5/98 395 – – – 75 No 76 88 .75 60 pulse/lb Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.9950 0.614 6/7/98 450 – – – 92 No 80 90 .6126 7/5/98 445 – – – 95 No 82 89 .6154 5/3/98 440 – – – 85 No 78 88 .6111 Was meter rezeroed? 0. 3.9925 Meter Factor • • • • • • • • Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : gal/min °F psig g/cc °F °F psig g/cc 2/4/98 420 – – – 70 No 73 87 .0025 1. Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run ABC Company Butadiene XYZ Proving Co. Calibration Factor K–Factor CMF300 123456789 RFT9739 987654321 667. Location Fluid Proving Co.08661 4 Mass Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.584.0050 1.0000 0.6098 9/6/98 410 – – – 93 No 82 89 .00% • • • • • • • Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 13 .General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 Figure 2-1.10% 0.15% Repeatability 0.9975 0.6196 3/8/98 400 – – – 65 No 73 90 .6112 8/2/98 435 – – – 94 No 84 87 .

it is advantageous to record the inventory readings from both meters simultaneously. It is important that the readings of the meters be taken at the same time every reporting period. the smaller the errors associated with recording the inventory readings will be. The meters should agree with each other within some predefined specification. The larger the reporting period. The pay meter is used for billing purposes and the check meter is used to ensure the pay meter is reading properly. In a typical pay-and-check metering application. The multiple meters verify one another’s performance. 14 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it is considered good practice to prove the pay meter on at least an annual basis. If the deviation between the meters exceeds the specification. multiple meters are proved upon installation. If possible. Then the inventory readings of the meters are checked against one another on a regular basis — usually monthly or weekly.2 General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? Pay and Check Meters Another common means for checking meter performance is to install two or more meters in a single pipeline. to minimize discrepancies between the readings of the meters. both meters should be proved to determine where the source of the discrepancy lies. In addition. This is most commonly performed with a “pay” meter and a “check” meter.

3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Mass Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Figure 3-1 Figure 3-2 Figure 3-3 Figure 3-4 Figure 3-5 Figure 3-6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum mass proving configuration . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . Meter Configured For Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . Mass proving with a density meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass proving using Coriolis density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 22 22 23 23 24 25 25 25 26 27 27 27 29 29 29 29 30 30 31 31 32 19 21 23 25 28 31 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . Transfer Standard Proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units . . . . . . . . . . .1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . Transfer standard proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . Maximum Volume Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Volume Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using a Density Meter at the Prover . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 3. . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

there are differences in the operation of the Coriolis meter that will require special consideration. many companies prefer to account for product on a standard volume basis.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Proving is performed by using a field reference device to verify the meter’s flow measurement accuracy. it can be treated like any volumetric meter.73 psia. Details of how these measurements are performed are presented in Appendices F and G. where q =Calculated volume flow · m =Measured mass flow ρ =Measured density Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 17 . Proving a Coriolis meter configured for volume measurement. Both conventional pipe provers and small volume provers are flow through volumetric proving device. These 3.1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement A Coriolis meter measures mass flow rate and density independently. Available equipment for proving Coriolis meters includes: • • • • • • Gravimetric tanks Volumetric tanks Conventional pipe provers Small volume provers Volumetric master meters Mass (Coriolis) master meters procedures are also directly applicable to small volume provers (or Compact Provers ). Because the meter measures both mass and density. (Eq. These procedures are generally applicable to master meters methods and tank proving methods. as shown in Equation 3-2. Standard volume is generally determined by applying temperature and pressure correction factors to the actual volumetric flow rate to adjust the volume to standard conditions. The measured volume is calculated as shown in Equation 3-1. generally 60°F and 14. This section provides a general overview of the procedures required to prove a Coriolis meter with a conventional pipe prover. 3-1) · m q = ---ρ When a Coriolis meter is configured for volume flow measurement. page 67. page 239. with some modification. For reasons of accounting tradition. Proving methods using other equipment listed above are discussed in detail in Section 8. Using a transfer standard to prove a Coriolis meter when the prover is undersized. and 3. The field reference device can be stationary or portable. ™ This discussion on proving procedures is divided into three main topics: 1. Although the methods for proving Coriolis meters and volumetric meters are very similar. Proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. 2. Additional technical details about the meter’s volume measurement are presented in Appendix H. it can also be used for determining volumetric flow rate.

This simplifies the proving process. so what is actually being calculated is: (Eq. because product volume changes with variations in temperature and pressure. 2. the transmitter 18 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement (Eq.* C tlm * C plm ρactual where ρactual = Actual measured density The correction factors Ctlm and Cplm are used to correct for the effect of temperature and pressure on the density of the fluid. The meter then measures mass flow. If a Coriolis meter’s volumetric flow rate is corrected to a standard volume. Actual volume cannot be used for product accounting. which can be used to display a standard volume. and a special units conversion factor can be entered into the transmitter. Products that expand significantly when flow is halted will require two valves to block the meter in. the standard density (ρstd) is known. The algorithm used by an RFT9739 is only for generalized petroleum products. With the conversion factor in place. Pressure and temperature at the prover and meter are essentially the same. where ρstd =Standard density The method described above is a roundabout way to obtain a flow rate measurement that is independent of changes in process conditions. yet displays the flow rate and flow total in standard volume units for accounting purposes. For petroleum products the RFT9739 transmitter is capable of performing a standard volume computation using API equation 2540. A single shutoff valve can be used to completely halt fluid flow through the sensor. 3-4) q std · m = -------ρ std Minimum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-1 illustrates the minimum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. This approach cannot be used for products with a composition that varies. the calculation being performed is: (Eq. This system can only be used under the following conditions: 1. If the product being measured is a pure product. Model RFT9739 and RFT9712 transmitters have a special units feature. The advantage of configuring the meter for volume measurement is that it can be proved in the same fashion as any volumetric meter. The transmitter is not capable of correcting to standard pressure. to allow zeroing. The measured temperature from the sensor is used to correct to a standard temperature of 60°F. 3-3) · m q std = --------------. Requirements for temperature and pressure agreement and distance between the meter and prover will depend upon the properties of the fluid. Details of proving equipment and procedures are presented in the following sections. because the meter’s measured volume can be compared directly to the prover volume. Accounting on a mass basis is less complicated. 3-2) q std = q actual * C tlm * C plm where qstd = Standard volume qactual = Actual measured volume Ctlm = Correction factor for thermal expansion of process fluid at the meter Cplm = Correction factor for pressure effect at the meter performs the calculation shown in Equation 3-4.

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 19 . V2. For portable proving systems. Proving Procedure The steps involved in proving a meter are: 1. page 195. Valve V2 is also used to halt flow to allow zeroing of the Coriolis meter. and closing valve V2. Minimum volumetric proving configuration. The counter is triggered by the prover detectors. 3. Ground the proving skid to prevent potential sparking. the connection is typically made with flexible hose. For stationary provers. • Prover that has a calibrated volume between the prover detectors • Pressure measured at the prover to correct for the effect of pressure on the prover volume (Cpsp) • Temperature measured at the prover to correct for the effect of temperature on the prover volume (Ctsp) • Pulse counter. and that its pressure rating is adequate. 2. Prior to proving. the piping should already be in place. the Coriolis meter’s zero reading should be checked as discussed on page 56. Fluid should flow through the prover for at least 10 minutes to allow the prover steel temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature. Flow Sensor Transmitter Pressure Coriolis meter Temperature Prover detectors Pulse counter Prover loop Proving Equipment Key components of this volume metering/ proving system include: • Coriolis meter • Proving connections consisting of block and bleed valves: V1. and V3. Make sure the hose is rigid enough that its volume doesn’t change during proving. Divert fluid through the prover by opening valves V1 and V3. and in Appendix E.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 3 Figure 3-1. Minimum requirements for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. Connect the prover to the proving connections. which is used to accumulate flow pulses from the Coriolis meter.

Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. can be used to record the proving data and perform the proving calculations. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. 6. (Eq. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 4. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. 5.* 100 Pulses MIN 20 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . illustrates the maximum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. 3-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Repeatability(%) = --------------------------------------------------------. Pressure and temperature at the prover is not representative of the conditions at the meter. Proving Calculations The repeatability of the proving is determined by taking the results of the three or five provings and performing the following calculation: (Eq. Perform proving calculations. 3. page 119. page 166 (Appendix A). 9. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. 7. Check for leaks. 2. 10. and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary. and must be diverted around the meter. Equation 3-6 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. 8. Maximum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-2. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. 3-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp MF v = -------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor where MFv = Meter factor. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. 11.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. page 21. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. provides additional details on proving calculations. If the repeatability is acceptable. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter. Perform two or three trial proving runs to ensure the temperature and pressure has stabilized (generally done by tripping a switch that releases the prover ball from the receiver into the prover). Proving form A-1. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. meter configured to indicated volume BPV = Base prover volume Ctsp = Correction factor for thermal expansion of steel at the prover Cpsp = Correction factor for pressure effect on steel at the prover Section 9. Components have been added to the minimum system to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run.

• Pressure measured at the meter to correct the measured fluid volume to standard pressure (Cplm) • Temperature measured at the meter to correct the measured fluid volume to standard temperature (Ctlm) • Pressure measured at the prover is also used to correct the fluid volume to standard pressure (Cplp) • Temperature measured at the prover is also used to correct the fluid volume to standard temperature (Ctlp) Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter. which includes valves V1. which are depicted in Figure 3-2.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 3 Figure 3-2. beyond those shown in Figure 3-1. V2. Therefore. 3. If the fluid is expansive. 4. In addition to recording the pressure and temperature at the prover. it might be necessary to record pressure and temperature at the meter. and V3. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. Maximum volumetric proving configuration. The bypass allows flow to be diverted around the meter to allow meter zeroing. page 19. are described below: 1. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. these devices will also have to be enabled. This is required for applications in which the flow through the pipeline cannot be stopped. Maximum requirements for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 21 . include: • Bypass loop. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. If pressure and temperature instrumentation at the meter is required. beyond those described on page 19. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. 2. Bypass loop (optional) Pressure Temperature Flow Sensor Transmitter Pressure Coriolis meter Pulse counter Temperature Prover detectors Prover loop Proving Equipment Additional components of this system.

Actual field practice may vary from these recommendations based on the required accuracy levels. it will be difficult to obtain acceptable repeatability. If the fluid density varies while the meter is being proved. 3. 3-7) BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp * Ctlp * Cplp MFv = ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses * C * C -------------------------------tlm plm K–Factor These calculations are detailed in proving form A-1. Equation 3-7 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. Determined from the Coriolis meter density measurement. In order to convert the prover volume to mass. using the average number of pulses from the proving runs. Calculated from measured temperature and pressure. an accurate density determination at the prover must be made. This system can only be used under the following conditions: 1. 2.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement Proving Calculations The repeatability of the proving is determined by taking the results of the three or five provings and performing the calculation shown in Equation 3-5. due to fluctuations in product composition or process conditions. (Eq. it is recommended that the average fluid density during the proving run be determined. The fluid density at the prover can be accurately determined from the pressure and temperature measurements. This is particularly true of light hydrocarbons.2 Meter Configured For Mass Measurement When a Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved against a volumetric prover. 22 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The Coriolis meter should be located close to the prover.05% is commonly required. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the density meter. the prover volume must be converted to mass units to allow comparison to the mass measured by the meter. A single shutoff valve can be used to completely halt fluid flow through the sensor to allow zeroing. it will be necessary to prove the density measurement to obtain a density factor (DF). and this average density be used in the meter factor calculation. and the meter factor may be in error. The Ctlp and Cplp correction factors are determined from API MPMS look-up tables. page 166 (Appendix A). 3. 2. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the Coriolis meter. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. The frequency of determining the density factor may be reduced if the density factor continually remains consistent from one proving to the next. For many process fluids the actual flowing density (not the density at standard conditions) does not remain constant. If a density measurement device is used. If the repeatability is acceptable. Any error in the determination of the density will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. This method is limited to well characterized products of known composition. A repeatability of less than 0. Determined from an in-line density meter located at the prover. The fluid density can be determined from any of the following methods: 1. Products that expand significantly when flow is halted will require two valves to block the meter in. It would be reasonable to prove the density measurement every time the Coriolis meter’s flow measurement is proved. Minimum Mass Proving Requirements Figure 3-3 illustrates the minimum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. In this situation.

the piping should already be in place. For stationary provers. Minimum requirements for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. • Prover that has a calibrated volume between the prover detectors • Pressure measured at the prover to correct for the effect of pressure on the prover volume (Cpsp) • Temperature measured at the prover to correct for the effect of temperature on the prover volume (Ctsp) • Density at the prover. and closing valve V2. Prior to proving. 4. Proving Procedure The steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement are described below: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 23 . which is used to accumulate flow pulses from the Coriolis meter. and V3. Flow Sensor V2 V1 V3 Transmitter Density determined from P &T Pressure Coriolis meter Temperature Prover detectors Pulse counter Prover loop Proving Equipment Key components of this mass metering/ proving system include: • Coriolis meter • Proving connections consisting of block and bleed valves V1. Make sure the hose is rigid enough that its volume doesn’t change during proving. Fluid should flow through the prover for at least 10 minutes to allow the prover steel temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Figure 3-3. Check for leaks and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary. Connect the prover to the proving connections. determined from the process fluid temperature and pressure • Pulse counter. 3. 1. For portable proving systems. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter. the Coriolis meter’s zero reading should be checked as discussed on page 56. page 195. Valve V2 is used to halt flow to allow zeroing of the Coriolis meter. and that its pressure rating is adequate. 2. 5. the connection is typically made with flexible hose. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. V2. and in Appendix E. Minimum mass proving configuration. Ground the proving skid to prevent potential sparking. The counter is triggered by the prover detectors. Divert fluid through the prover by opening valves V1 and V3.

the repeatability should be based on the meter factor for the individual provings. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. provides additional information on proving calculations. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. page 119. Therefore.025% repeatability allowance for the meter and the rest of the proving system. when performing a mass-tovolume proving. If the product density were to vary during the proving. 3-9) BPV * C tsp * Cpsp * ρ p MF m = ----------------------------------------------------- Meter Factor -------------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Calculations A significant difference between mass and volume proving is the method that is used to determine proving repeatability. Perform proving calculations.0002 g/cc. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. Perform two to three trial proving runs to ensure the temperature and pressure has stabilized (generally done by tripping a switch that releases the prover ball from the receiver into the prover). 7.* 100 MF MIN Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. can be used to record data. Next. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. This leaves only a 0. However. (Eq. Proving form B-1. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are determined from Equation 3-9. and shows the calculation steps. page 176 (Appendix B). the pulse repeatability would not account for variations in product density. the pulse repeatability may be unacceptable. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. the Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. the repeatability can be based on the number of pulses accumulated. A look-up table or an equation is used to obtain the density of the fluid from the recorded pressure and temperature. and the repeatability is based on the maximum and minimum meter factors from the runs.025% of the repeatability specification. 3-8) MF MAX – MF MIN Repeatability(%) = ----------------------------------------. Based on a fluid with a density of 0. the product density must first be determined. The product density during the proving should vary by no more than 0. not the accumulated pulses. Then the meter factors for the individual proving runs are calculated as shown in Equation 3-9. (Eq. for mass-to-volume proving. 10. 8. 11. 9. Before calculating the meter factor. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. this level of density variation would take up 0. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 6.8 g/cc. This where ρp = fluid density under flowing conditions at the prover Section 9. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. calculation is shown in Equation 3-8. For volumeto-volume proving. 24 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

and must be diverted around the meter. The bypass allows flow to be diverted around the meter to allow meter zeroing. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. 4.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Figure 3-4. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 25 . 3. Figure 3-4 illustrates the equipment requirement for this scenario.0002 g/cc) during the proving pass or run. beyond those shown in Figure 3-3. Components have been added to the minimum mass proving system to accommodate the following circumstances: 1. The density of the fluid cannot be held constant (within ±0. if the fluid density does not remain constant during the proving pass or run • An optional bypass loop. V2. The density at the prover cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements. include: • A density meter at the prover (a small Coriolis meter installed at the prover can be used to provide density measurement) • A density proving system for the density meter • An optional density averager. and V3. Mass proving with a density meter. 2. This is required for applications in which the flow through the pipeline cannot be stopped. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. which includes valves V1. Bypass loop (optional) V1 Flow V2 Sensor V3 V5 V4 V7 V6 Transmitter Density meter V8 V10 V9 V11 Coriolis meter Density averager (optional) Pulse counter Density sampler Pressure Prover detectors Temperature Prover loop Using a Density Meter at the Prover This example is a variant of the procedure described above for minimum mass proving requirements. Requirements for using a density meter at the prover for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. Proving Equipment Additional components of this mass metering/proving system. requiring an average density to be determined. It applies when the density cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements at the prover. Add only those items that are needed for the particular application. page 23. All of these components may not be required.

(Figure 3-4 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. Valve V11 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. Care should be taken to ensure that flashing or cavitation does not result from dropping the pressure. 3-10) Density from Density Sample DF = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------Density Meter Reading The density of the fluid at the prover (ρp) is obtained from the density meter reading. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated as shown in Equation 3-11. Although form C-1 specifies that it is for proving the Coriolis meter density. V10. provides additional information on proving calculations. page 176 (Appendix B). This is accomplished by opening valves V7. 2. and shows the calculation steps. the system is returned to normal operation by opening valve V8 and closing valves V10 and V9. This process is repeated two to three times. 5. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. page 25. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. it is applicable to any density meter. if required. Therefore. If the fluid is expansive. as shown in Equation 3-10. 26 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 146. beyond those described beginning on page 23. for a complete description of this process. the density reading from the density meter is recorded along with the other proving data. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. can be used to record data. An additional calculation is also performed: the determination of the density meter’s density factor. Fluid is circulated through the density meter and density sampling container until the temperature at both locations has stabilized and the two temperatures agree to within 0. This will either be obtained from the density meter or the density averager. a density sample is collected and the density meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors and the density meter’s density measurement output. the density meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined. 3. and V9. (Eq.2°C. it must be enabled. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. page 119. (Eq. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. Valve V11 is still used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. If the optional density averager is used. page 186 (Appendix C). Density proving form C-1. are described below: 1. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. While the meter is being proved. Proving form B-1. The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the density meter’s density measurement during the proving run. to ensure the density factor is repeatable. Refer to Section 11. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving pass or run.) Once conditions have stabilized. the repeatability value is calculated by using the meter factor. For safety reasons valve V8 would need to be opened before closing valves V10 and V9. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. page 24).4. After the density factor has been determined. 4.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement using a density meter at the prover. is used for determining the density meter’s density factor. 6. which are depicted in Figure 3-4. 3-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MF m = --------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses --------------------------------- K–Factor Section 9. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. The density meter must be enabled. 7.

The bypass allows flow to be diverted around the meter to allow meter zeroing. page 28. • Optional Cplm determination from pressure measured at the meter. and V3. are described below: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 27 . beyond those shown in Figure 3-3. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard temperature • Optional Cplp determination from pressure measured at the prover. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. which eliminates problems associated with sampling systems that are required with most density meters. if the fluid density does not remain constant during the proving • An optional bypass loop. page 23. additional pressure and temperature measurements at the meter will be required to correct the density measurement to prover conditions. 2. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlm determination from temperature measured at the meter. Add only those items that are needed for the particular application. to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. to correct the fluid volume to standard temperature All of the components may not be required. include: • A density proving system for the Coriolis meter • An optional density averager. Figure 3-5. Maintenance is reduced because one less instrument is used in the system. The Coriolis meter samples the entire fluid stream. 3. This is required for applications in which the flow through the pipeline cannot be stopped. 3. illustrates the equipment requirement for using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. The density of the fluid cannot be held constant while the meter is being proved. 4. requiring an average density to be determined.4. The disadvantage of using this system is that the density measurement is not located at the prover. page 146. Proving Equipment Additional components of this mass metering/proving system. If the conditions at the prover and Coriolis meter are not similar. The system includes an optional bypass loop to allow meter zeroing. which includes valves V1. illustrates a density proving system that is installed parallel to the Coriolis meter. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. V2. The advantages and disadvantages of series and parallel density proving systems are discussed in detail in Section 11. Figure 3-5. and must be diverted around the meter. page 23. The cost of the proving system is reduced because an additional density meter is not required. An in-series density proving system can also be used. 2. beyond those described beginning on page 23. to correct the fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlp determination from temperature measured at the prover.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement There are significant advantages to using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement instead of using a density meter at the prover: 1. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. page 28. The density at the prover cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements. shown in Figure 3-3. Components have been added to the minimum mass proving system.

Bypass loop (optional) V1 Flow V7 V2 Pressure and temperature (optional) Density sampling loop (optional) V3 V5 V8 V4 V6 Sensor Transmitter Pressure Coriolis meter Temperature Density averager (optional) Pulse counter Prover detectors Prover loop 1. Requirements for using a Coriolis meter density measurement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. page 146. V4. The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the Coriolis meter’s density measurement during the proving run. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. While the meter is being proved. After the density factor has been determined.2°F. In addition to recording the pressure and temperature at the prover. the system is returned to normal operation by closing valves V7 and V8. or V6 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. Mass proving using Coriolis density.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement Figure 3-5. If the optional density averager is used. which are depicted in Figure 3-5. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined.) Once conditions have stabilized. Therefore. This process is repeated two to three times to ensure the density factor is repeatable. Prior to proving the meter. Fluid is circulated through the density sampling loop until the temperature at the density sample loop and the Coriolis meter has stabilized and the two temperatures agree to within 0. 4. V4. This is accomplished by opening valves V7 and V8. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving run. 3. it must be enabled. 28 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 7. Valve V3. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. (Figure 3-5 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. If the fluid is expansive. Refer to Section 11. it may be necessary to record pressure and temperature at the Coriolis meter. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors. 5. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. and V6 are fully opened. a density sample is collected and the Coriolis meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. and the Coriolis meter’s density measurement output. the density reading from the Coriolis meter is recorded along with the other proving data. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. 6. 2. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. for a complete description of this process. Valves V3.4.

not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. If this is not the case. Proving Equipment The equipment required is the same as shown in Figure 3-5. Established volume proving procedures can be used (as described in Section 3. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated using Equation 3-11. except the density averager is entirely eliminated. and back to mass measurement after proving. page 26. the repeatability is calculated by using the meter factor. Alternately. to make sure the number of pulses output while in the volume measurement mode are essentially the same as the number of pulses that would be output while in the mass measurement mode. and form C-2. the Coriolis meter pulse output must be reconfigured to volume measurement using a Rosemount HART ® ® Proving in Volume Units/ Measuring in Mass Units Another alternative for performing the proving using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement is to configure the meter for volume measurement during the proving process. is used to convert the Coriolis meter density to prover conditions as shown in Equation 3-13. The Ctl and Cpl correction factors are determined from API MPMS lookup tables. is used to determine the density factor. 2. the meter’s K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. the density at the Coriolis meter must be converted to the prover conditions by using Equation 3-13. page 119. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined (Step 3. can be used to record data. page 187. The disadvantages of this approach are: 1. beyond those described in Section 3. and then changed back to the original value when it is returned to mass measurement.1. page 17). 2. The advantages of this approach are: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 29 . Density proving form C-1. 3-13) C tlp * C plp ρ p = ρ m * --------------------------C tlm * C plm Temperature and pressure measurements at the Coriolis meter are used to determine the Ctlm and Cplm correction factors shown in Equation 3-13. Section 9. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement by using its pulse output to indicate volume. and perhaps adjusted. 2.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. are described below: 1. then return the configuration to mass measurement for normal measurement. and shows the calculation steps. and the meter must be changed from mass to volume measurement during proving. a separate density averager is not required. because the meter is continuously sampling the process fluid density. page 176 (Appendix B). (Eq. Before the proving is initiated. (Eq. The volume measurement obtained from the Coriolis meter will integrate any density variations. page 186 (Appendix C). or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. To ensure the product inventory is not compromised during the proving. the same equation that was used for the density meter at the prover. page 28. provides a more detailed discussion of proving calculations. The Coriolis meter’s density reading and density factor are used in this equation. The Coriolis meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. The meter configuration parameters must be accessed. 3-12) Density from Density Sample DF = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density Reading 1. page 17. Proving form B-1. page 28). Equation 3-11 can be used as long as the process conditions at the Coriolis meter and the prover are the same. Prior to proving the meter. page 24). If the fluid density varies during the proving.1. the K-factor in the accounting system would have to be changed to match the value obtained from the meter when it is configured for volume measurement.

This will result in an error in the meter factor that is determined. page 20. The longer the proving time. page 22. then the Coriolis meter is proved against the turbine meter. page 17. Therefore.3 Transfer Standard Proving When using small volume provers or undersized conventional provers. (Eq. the master meter’s meter factor has not been established under actual operating conditions.1. The K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. In some applications the prover is too small for the Coriolis meter. the Coriolis meter and turbine meter measurements can be compared for one minute or more. whichever is appropriate. If the proving run is too short. and depends on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. Master meter proving typically utilizes a “master” meter that has been calibrated in a laboratory setting. 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . and cannot be used to provide accurate. as shown in Proving form A-1. The fundamental measurement of a Coriolis meter is time based. This provides a longer time base for the Coriolis meter to perform measurements. a transfer standard proving method can be employed. Adjustments to this value or the inventory calculation may be required to ensure that the inventory measurement remains correct during the proving. This occurs most commonly when a small-volume prover is used to prove a relatively large Coriolis meter. repeatable proving results. 4. or Equation 3-7. page 186 (Appendix C). The volume meter factor is calculated from either Equation 3-6. The meter is returned to the mass measurement configuration once the proving is completed. The turbine meter is first proved against the prover. resulting in a more precise measurement. resulting in poorer repeatability. page 166 (Appendix A). The meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. Equation 3-5. The calculation shown in Equation 3-14 can be added to the bottom of form A-1. due to a mismatch between the prover size and the Coriolis meter’s response time. The master meter is brought out to the field. ® 3. page 20. The meter is proved as a volume meter as described in Section 3. If the prover prerun is too short. Master meter proving has uncertainty associated with the effect of the actual operating conditions on the master meter’s calibration. such as a turbine meter.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving Communicator or the Micro Motion ProLink software program. If a larger prover is not available. page 29. and form C-1. is used to obtain the volume meter factor (MFv). the more measurement samples that are made. When the proving is initiated. 5. The transfer standard method uses a meter with a very fast response time. to prove the Coriolis meter. the repeatability calculation can be based on the number of pulses measured. It is important to distinguish transfer standard proving from master meter proving. is used to obtain the density factor (DF). the Coriolis meter pulse output may not represent the actual flow rate before the pulse accumulation begins. 3-14) MF m = MF v * DF Proving Calculations Because the meter is configured for volume measurement during the proving process. and is used as the reference to determine a meter factor for the test meter. The mass meter factor is then determined by multiplying the Coriolis meter’s density factor by the volume meter factor as shown in Equation 3-14. there is usually a drop in flow rate. resulting in improved repeatability. the Coriolis meter will inherently perform fewer measurements. Since there is no fixed prover volume limiting the proving time. 3. there may be difficulties in obtaining good repeatability.

page 17. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. and Section 3.2. density meters and density averagers are not included. The proving duration should be between one and two minutes.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving 3 Figure 3-6. Refer to Section 3. For transfer standard proving. temperature and flow rate are recorded while the meter is being proved. Additionally. The Coriolis meter is then proved against the turbine meter. should be followed to prove the turbine meter. A series of three to five proving runs are performed. 3. Flow Sensor V2 V1 V3 Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Prover detectors 2-channel pulse counter Prover loop For transfer standard proving. The procedures described in Section 3. Any changes in the flow rate may affect the turbine meter’s meter factor. The unique items required for a transfer standard proving are: 1.1. the uncertainty associated with changing process conditions is eliminated. these components may be required. beyond those described Section 3. against the prover.1. This method can be used for a Coriolis meter configured for volume or mass measurement. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in performing a transfer standard proving. Only the minimum equipment requirement is shown. are presented below: 1. by activating the twochannel pulse counter to accumulate pulses from both meters. however. Proving Equipment Figure 3-6. page 17. A volume meter factor (MFv) is determined for the turbine meter. 4. the meter factor for the transfer standard meter is determined at actual operating conditions. illustrates the equipment requirement for performing a transfer standard proving.2. pressure and temperature measurement at the Coriolis meter may be required if the conditions at the Coriolis meter and the turbine meter are not relatively the same. 2. It is important that the turbine meter be proved at the same flow rate as the Coriolis meter. page 22. A two-channel pulse counter. page 22. the turbine meter must first be proved. page 31. and Section 3. Then the transfer standard meter is used immediately to determine the meter factor for the Coriolis meter. Requirements for using transfer standard for proving Coriolis meter. for additional equipment requirements. page 17.1. The pressure. additional items such as bypass loops. Transfer standard proving configuration. A fast response turbine meter 2. with a push button or some other means to activate the accumulation of pulses from both the turbine meter and Coriolis meter simultaneously Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 31 .

as shown in Equation 3-7. but depends on the proving time. Then proving form B-4. page 24. page 26.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving Proving Calculations The proving calculations will depend on whether the Coriolis meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. may be needed to correct to the conditions at the turbine. Volume Measurement Since the proving volume is not constant with this method. density proving form C-1. repeatability cannot be based on the pulses accumulated per proving run. The meter factor is calculated as shown in Equation 3-16. if the temperature and pressure at the Coriolis meter and turbine meter are sufficiently different. as shown in Equation 3-8. as shown in Equation 3-8. page 166 (Appendix A). 3-16) Turbine Meter Pulses ---------------------------------------------------------------. or from the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. Proving form A-1. Proving form A-1. If required. page 186 (Appendix C). (Eq. page 187. proving form A-4. (Eq. page 166 (Appendix A). and form C-2. or Equation 3-12. The meter factor is calculated from Equation 3-15. * MF turbine * ρ p * DF Turbine K–Factor = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis Meter Pulses -------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis K–Factor MFm The density at the transfer standard (ρp) is determined either by calculation from pressure and temperature. as shown by Equation 3-10. page 179 (Appendix B). can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. the repeatability must be based on the meter factor. Then. is used to convert the density at the Coriolis meter to the transfer standard conditions. Mass Measurement As with the other proving methods for a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. page 24. 32 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . liquid temperature and pressure correction factors will be required. then Equation 3-13. 3-15) Turbine Meter Pulses * MF -------------------------------------------------------------turbine Turbine K–Factor MF v = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis Meter Pulses -------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis K–Factor However. page 22. The repeatability must be based on the meter factor. page 169. a density factor will need to be determined. page 29. is used to determine the density factor. These factors would be applied in the same fashion as for provers. from a density meter at the prover. page 29. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. If a density meter or the Coriolis meter are used to determine density. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. If the Coriolis meter is used.

4 Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 33 .

34 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The pressure effect for large ELITE sensors is an order of magnitude less than for comparably sized Model D sensors. If a D300 or D600 sensor is used in an application where the pressure varies by more than ±15 psi. there was no ELITE sensor that would cover the flow range of the D600 sensor. (For more information about pressure effect and pressure compensation. Because ELITE sensors and pressure compensated D600 sensors are primarily recommended for use with RFT9739 transmitters in custody transfer applications. The meter selected for custody transfer should be as immune as possible to process and ambient influences. the rest of the discussion on meter outputs and proving techniques focuses on these devices.4 Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer For custody transfer applications. The RFT9739 employs an explosionproof housing for hazardous area installations. High-pressure Model D sensors are the least suitable for custody transfer applications. The preferred devices for custody transfer applications are ELITE® sensors with RFT9739 transmitters. the flow and density measurements of Model D300 and D600 sensors have a significant pressure effect. (For more information about pressure effect. Because they are fabricated using a very thick-walled sensor tube. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 35 . For the purposes of custody transfer. which can be beneficial in hazardous areas. it should be pressure compensated. all ELITE sensors include secondary pressure containment. because of its highly accurate density measurement and temperature stability. Use high-pressure sensors only in applications for which there are no suitable ELITE or standard-pressure Model D sensors available. refer to page 212. At the time this document was written. the meter used should be of the highest accuracy available to minimize any errors in the inventory measurement.) In addition. ELITE sensors have the best flow and density measurement accuracy of the Micro Motion sensor product offering.) Pressure compensation for CMF200 and CMF300 sensors is also recommended for applications in which the pressure varies by more than ±150 psig.1% can result in a substantial product accounting error over a period of time. an ELITE CMF300 would be a better choice than the D300. The RFT9739 transmitter is preferred over the RFT9712. A deviation in the flow rate measurement of as little as 0. their sensitivity and zero stability are lessened. For applications in which the pressure does not remain constant. refer to page 212. and is available in a rack-mount version for safe area locations.

36 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . .5 Figure 5-1 Figure 5-2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 37 . . . . . . Liquid Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vertical Pipeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 39 41 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Sensor Mounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 5. . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Coriolis sensor orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor installation . . . . . . . Location of Proving Connections. . . . . . . . .4 5. . . . . Gas Measurement. . . . Minimizing External Influences on the Meter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Flow Tube Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

It is also good practice in new piping installations to flow the line with the spool piece in place to clear debris from the pipe. The heavy manifold of the sensor is designed to isolate it from external stresses. it is recommended that a spool piece be used in place of the sensor to ensure proper pipe alignment.5 Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Coriolis sensors are rugged measurement instruments that perform well in harsh environments. suitable practices must be followed when installing the equipment to ensure optimum performance. However. Micro Motion Coriolis meters do not require any special mounting supports. Shown is an ELITE® CMF300 sensor. and the sensor must never be used to support process piping. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 39 . 5. Pipeline supports must not be attached directly to the sensor or sensor flanges. When a new meter installation is being fabricated. Figure 5-1. The sensor is insensitive to tensile and compressive forces. Use normal plant practices to minimize the influence of torsional stresses on the sensor. Typical sensor installation. If the piping is sufficiently rigid. as indicated in Figure 5-1. If the sensor itself is used to align piping. but is susceptible to excessive torsional forces—such as when the sensor is used to align misaligned piping. damage could result. the sensor can simply be bolted into the pipeline. Pipe stresses can affect a Coriolis sensor if they affect the alignment of the sensor flanges relative to one another.1 Sensor Mounting Under normal conditions.

To prevent accounting lapses during the bypass operation. An installation can deviate from these orientation guidelines as long as one basic rule is kept in mind: keep the sensor full of process fluid. When measuring gas. the sensor should be oriented with the tubes (or case) pointed 5. checking the meter zero is an essential diagnostic tool. Gases may flow in either direction.5 Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing 5. Downward flow can result in incomplete filling of the sensor if there is insufficient back pressure. When measuring liquids. a block valve located downstream of the sensor is necessary. up or down. avoiding pockets of gas in liquids. to prevent liquid from accumulating in the sensor tubes. or allows it to be entirely drained of fluid. to allow zeroing of the meter. In many pipeline applications. the sensor can be oriented with the tubes (or case) pointed upward. and may require rezeroing once it is brought into service. it is preferable to have shut-off valves located both upstream and downstream of the sensor to block it in during zeroing. Liquid Measurement For liquid measurement. If the sensor is located in a pipeline that has significant flow pulsations. product will not be accounted for during the bypass operation.3 Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing Valves for stopping flow through the Coriolis sensor are required. When analyzing the performance of a Coriolis meter. Figure 5-2 illustrates recommended sensor orientations. Therefore. avoid installing the sensor at a high point in the pipeline. 40 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . liquids and slurries should be pumped upward through the sensor. downward. The meter must be zeroed when it is first installed. or the process fluid expands when flow is halted. and pockets of liquid in gas. upward. Vertical Pipeline If the sensor is mounted in a vertical pipeline. or in the “flag” position (mounted in a vertical run of pipe). or in the “flag” position (mounted in a vertical run of pipe) with fluid flowing upward through the sensor.2 Sensor Flow Tube Orientation The sensor should be oriented in a position that keeps it full of process fluid. because gas can accumulate in the sensor tubes. a meter can be placed on the bypass line. Any orientations will be successful if the sensor tubes remain full of liquid. the sensor should not be installed at a low point in the pipeline. because condensation can accumulate in the sensor tubes. the flow of fluid cannot be stopped easily. At a minimum. Gas Measurement For gas measurement. or the duration of the bypass can be timed and the flow rate assumed to be the last measured flow rate through the meter (the total quantity during bypass is then determined by multiplying the bypass time by the flow rate). a bypass loop around the sensor may be required. This quantity can then be added to the meter inventory. If a bypass is used.

Sensor model Liquids Preferred orientations Tubes down Horizontal pipeline Alternative orientations Tubes up Horizontal pipeline Self-draining Flag mount Vertical pipeline Self-draining Flow Gases Tubes up Horizontal pipeline Flag mount Vertical pipeline Slurries Flag mount Vertical pipeline Self-draining Tubes up Horizontal pipeline Self-draining Flow Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 41 .Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing 5 Figure 5-2. Recommended Coriolis sensor orientation.

If multiple meters of the same size and model will be installed in close proximity on the same piping. American Petroleum Institute (API) standards make no specific recommendations for acceptable distances. 42 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . but do advise minimizing the distance. and radio transmitters. some type of vibration isolation may be required. which would lead to measurement errors.4 Minimizing External Influences on the Meter Avoid installing the cable that connects the sensor and transmitter near power supplies or devices such as electric motors. Although this recommendation is considered “good piping practice” for any type of flowmeter. which minimizes any flow pulsations or influences caused by the prover. transformers. (For an explanation of vibration effects on the sensor. It is more critical when the meter will be used to measure density. care must be taken to ensure that the volume of the connections does not change during proving. 5. refer to page 218. which generate strong magnetic fields and could affect the electromagnetic signals from the sensor pickoffs. to isolate the sensors from one another. The electrical signal that is used for proving the meter is obtained from the transmitter — it is not available from the sensor. The need for insulation is dependent upon the particular application.5 Location of Proving Connections The proving connections should be located as close to the meter as is practical. This is commonly required for D meters. it may be beneficial to insulate the sensor. it is not critical for Coriolis meters. the meter should be located upstream of the proving device. Generally. and when the process fluid flow rate is relatively low. signal wiring must be routed from the transmitter to the proving location.5 Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Location of Proving Connections 5.) If the ambient temperature is significantly different than the process fluid temperature (greater than 30°C difference). If flexible hose or piping is used to connect the prover to the process pipeline. If the transmitter is in a different location than the sensor. but rarely required for ELITE meters.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wiring to Allow Field-Access to Meter Information . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis meter response during proving . . . . . RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero. . . . Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . .5 Figure 6-1a Figure 6-1b Figure 6-1c Figure 6-2 Figure 6-3 Figure 6-4a Figure 6-4b Table 6-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 43 . . . . . . . RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic. . . K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 6. . . . . . . . Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Bell 202 Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies . . . . . . RFT9739 field-mount local access terminals . . . . . . . . .1 Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RS-485 Multidrop Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Rate . 46 47 47 47 47 48 48 49 49 49 52 53 53 53 54 56 56 56 56 56 57 50 50 50 51 55 57 57 54 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Duration of the Prover Prerun . . . . . . . Response Time/Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low-Flow Cutoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interface to Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 6. . . . . . . Using the RS-485 Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Analog Outputs . . . . . Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bell 202 Multidrop Networks. . . . .6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Output . . RFT9739 rack-mount local access terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional Flow Measurement Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

page 205. as shown in Equation 6-3. 6-2) · m = K * ∆t A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. However. The frequency/pulse output can represent either mass or volumetric flow rate. it is possible to read process variables. 6-3) 1 ρ = C a -. reconfigure the meter. and is typically determined by proving the meter. However. a Coriolis meter’s K-factor does not describe its inherent flow calibration. The density calibration constants Ca and Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 45 . While communicating digitally. as shown in Equation 6-1. as shown in Equation 6-4. (Eq. (Eq. the digital flow rate reading cannot be easily proved using conventional proving equipment. Details on volumetric flow rate are presented in Appendix H. The K-factor represents the inherent calibration of the meter.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Proving systems typically use a pulse counter to determine the number of pulses output from the meter during a proving run. (Eq. However. density. as well as density. The analog outputs can represent mass and volumetric flow rate. The mass flow rate. 6-4) · m q = ---ρ or Total Pulses PD K–Factor = -------------------------------------------Prover Volume Additional details on the meter’s mass flow rate measurement are presented in Appendix F. – C b f 2 The volumetric flow rate (q) is determined from the Coriolis meter’s independent mass · flow rate ( m ) and density measurements (ρ). This digital information can be accessed directly through the transmitter’s RS-485 or Bell 202 output. The fundamental mass flow characteristic of a Coriolis meter is described by its flow calibration factor (K) in units of grams-persecond flow per microsecond time difference between the pickoff signals. (Eq. page 239. and perform meter diagnostics. and therefore are difficult to prove. The total number of pulses accumulated by the proving pulse counter is divided by the prover volume to obtain the meter’s K-factor. This output can be easily totalized and is readily proved. and volumetric flow rate are calculated by the transmitter microprocessor. The meter’s · mass flow measurement ( m ) is determined by multiplying the meter’s flow calibration factor (K) by the time difference between the sensor’s pickoff signals (∆t). analog outputs cannot be easily totalized. Additional circuitry in the transmitter is used to convert this digital information into a frequency/pulse output and analog outputs. as shown in Equation 6-2. Details on density measurements are presented in Appendix G. page 223. 6-1) Total Pulses Turbine K–Factor = -----------------------------------------Prover Volume Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated. For turbine and PD meters there is a characteristic K-factor that describes the number of pulses output by the meter per unit volume of fluid that is measured by the meter.

requires an input from an external DP transmitter) If the transmitter has an integral display. Digital flow measurements are not proved easily. 6. • Use frequency/pulse output for mass or volume flow inventory measurement. the primary Coriolis meter measurement is performed by the transmitter microprocessor.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Digital Information For field proving applications. Means of accessing the information described above is presented in the following sections. The resultant digital output is the most accurate representation of the meter’s measurements. The following process information can be read from the transmitter using digital communications: • • • • • Mass flow rate Density Volumetric flow rate Temperature Mass total (two registers available. the following operations can be performed: • Read meter measurements • Perform meter calibration and zeroing operations • Change meter configuration • Change output scaling • Trim analog outputs • Perform tests on outputs The digital information from the transmitter is the most complete. Analog flow measurements are not proved easily. the following discussion is based on the features of the RFT9739. Because the frequency/pulse measurement is derived from the digital value. Additional information relevant to the meter’s flow measurement is also discussed. Even though the digital flow rate measurements are not proved easily. density and temperature will usually be displayed. one for inventory and one for totalization) • Pressure (optional. flow total. If density averaging is needed. Digital output can also be used for mass or volume flow inventory measurement. the digital totals can still be used for inventory purposes or to check the total determined by a separate pulse totalizer. requires an input from an external DP transmitter) • Viscosity (optional calculation. • Use analog to obtain the process fluid density. it can be read using a HART Communicator or the ProLink software program. Using digital communications. it is recommended that the Coriolis meter outputs be used in the following fashion: • Use digital output for meter diagnostics and obtaining the density reading. one for inventory and one for totalization) • Volume total (two registers available. the digital density output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average the digital information. Since the RFT9739 is most suitable for custody transfer measurement.1 Digital Information As stated previously. 46 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . the flow rate. and some wiring recommendations for accessing the meter’s outputs are made. the digital totals and the totalized frequency/pulse should be the same. The density measurement can also be obtained by using an appropriate flow computer. if it will not be obtained from the digital reading. PLC or DCS. The frequency/pulse measurement is proved easily. requires an input from an external pressure transmitter) • Differential pressure (optional. If a density measurement is needed.

If polling addresses are used. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 47 . with a baud rate limited to 1200 baud.2 or 2. PLC. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output.) For more information about the HART Communicator. (The older Rosemount communicator. the SMART FAMILY® Interface Model 268. which will convert either Bell 202 or RS-485 communications to RS-232. cannot be used with later-model RFT9739 transmitters. and operates in the Microsoft® Windows® graphical environment. Using the RS-485 Output The RS-485 output signal is a ±5V square wave referenced to the transmitter ground. Using ProLink Software with Micro Motion Transmitters. RS-485 Multidrop Networks Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. Depending on the selected protocol. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. The digital information from the transmitter can be obtained in a number of ways: • Using the RS-485 output and HART protocol • Using the RS-485 output and Modbus protocol • Using the Bell 202 standard and HART protocol Any external computing/monitoring device (flow computer. requirements vary as follows. Micro Motion also has available a PC-based communications package. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. Using the HART Communicator with Micro Motion Transmitters. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22(485A).4 kilobaud can be selected. use terminals 26 (485B) and 27 (485A). With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. HART Protocol Under HART protocol. or DCS) that supports the HART or Modbus protocol can be used to acquire the digital information directly from the transmitter. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. This handheld device is particularly convenient for field configuration and monitoring of the meter.2 kHz. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. The program requires a personal computer with an Intel® 386 or higher-version microprocessor. The ProLink program has additional features for performing meter diagnostics and logging data to ASCII data files for further analysis.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. and must not exceed 4000 feet (1220 meters) in length. see the following Micro Motion instruction manuals: • RFT9739 Transmitter-Specific (HART)Command Specification • Using Modbus Protocol with the Micro Motion ELITE Model RFT9739 Transmitter The handheld Rosemount HART Communicator Model 275 provides communication with the transmitter using the Bell 202 standard. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. Baud rates between 1200 baud and 38. For more information. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 24 AWG (0.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals DigitalInformation 6 Interface to Digital Information The transmitter supports two digital communications protocols: HART and Modbus®. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. the ProLink software program. Modbus Protocol Under Modbus protocol. For more information.

The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. the analog output is not recommended for inventory measurement. If density averaging is needed. which discusses configuring analog outputs for density measurement. in order to carry out these operations. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. The analog output is useful for monitoring flow rate independently of the frequency/pulse output. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. analog outputs are not proved easily. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). 15 meters for 0.The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). HART Communicator or ProLink software.2 Analog Output The transmitter analog output is used primarily for process control applications. or refer to Analog Density. Analog outputs must be properly scaled and trimmed.1 mm2 wire). There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. 48 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. this output can be used to evaluate meter rezeroing requirements. Therefore. requires an input from an external DP transducer) • Viscosity (optional calculation. Therefore. Any two of the following variables can be obtained from the analog outputs: • • • • • Mass flow rate Density Volumetric flow rate Temperature Differential pressure (optional. the primary variable (PV) analog output. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire. transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. requires an input from an external DP transducer) As stated previously. The analog outputs are useful for providing general process information.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal. If a density measurement is needed. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. Refer to the appropriate configurations manual. whereas. and is not typically used for custody transfer measurement. page 144. The analog information must be integrated to obtain the total flow. one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device. the frequency/pulse output is easily totalized by simply counting pulses.3 mm2 wire. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Analog Output A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY 6. By applying no low-flow cutoff to an analog flow measurement.

The output circuit is rated to 30 VDC. The pulse will be off (OV) for 0. To provide sufficient pulse resolution.000 Hz. The frequency output can be scaled from 0. and be on (high voltage) for the remaining pulse duration. Signal input requirements vary from one device to the next. The output is galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. with a 15V logic level square wave. twisted-pair. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. the meter does not require additional power input.1 to 10. However.3 mm2) or larger. This is different from many turbine and PD meters.3 Frequency/Pulse Output The frequency output from the meter is used primarily for batching and inventory measurement. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. A pull-up resistor provides an output impedance of 2. In this case only the SV output can be used. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 49 . so an external DC power supply is not required. and has out-of-range capability to 15. which use an external power source from the prover counter. There is one frequency output available from the RFT9739. terminal 15 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal 16 (RETURN) is the return line. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. the RFT9739 can be modified to make it an “open collector” output. avoid using a counter that will not accommodate at least a 5000 Hz input. page 50. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter.000 Hz. A schematic of the frequency output for the RFT9739 is shown in Figure 6-1a. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output The standard output is internally powered. with 0. The square wave has a 50/50 duty cycle for frequencies greater than 1 Hz.5 sec.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/PulseOutput 6 Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered. Because the output is internally powered. the output is no longer 50/50 duty cycle. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA.000 Hz input signal.2 kohm at the 15 volt logic level. as shown in the schematic in Figure 6-1b. with a 1000 ohm load limit. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). shielded cable. Although most devices accept a 10. unloaded. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. page 50. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA.1 amp maximum sinking capability. terminal CN2-D24 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal CN2-D26 (RETURN) is the return. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. The PV analog output is disabled if the RFT9739 is configured for HART communication over the Bell 202 output and the RFT9739 has been assigned an address other than 0 for multidrop communication. which can represent either of the following variables: • Mass flow rate • Volumetric flow rate The frequency/pulse output is easily proved using a standard proving counter. some are limited to 5000 Hz or lower. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). For best results. 6. the frequency output signal wiring must be 22 AWG (0. A variety of proving counters can be used to accumulate pulses. For frequencies less than 1 Hz. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.

VF+ 15V 2. VF+ 15V 2. VF+ 15V VF+ Freq+ Pulse out VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 Figure 6-1c.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output Figure 6-1a. RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic.2 kohm Freq+ Pulse out Add diode or resistor to limit or reduce output voltage VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 VF+ 50 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .2 kohm Freq+ Pulse out VF+ VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 Figure 6-1b. RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. Resistance is added to decrease input voltage to pulse counting device. Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic.

6-7) 1 R = ------------------------------------1 1 1 ----. ohms where R1. R3 = the resistance across each of the counting devices It might be necessary to add a Zener diode. to bring the voltage down to an acceptable value. (Eq. The resistance from the signal wiring and the counter’s signal input circuitry will load this voltage down to a lesser value. to determine the required resistance for a given voltage limit.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/PulseOutput 6 The allowable voltage input into the counting device also varies from one counter to the next. Equation 6-5 can be rearranged as shown in Equation 6-6. The only limitation to the number of devices that can be used is the overall resistive load. as illustrated in Figure 6-1c. The RFT9739 outputs a 15V unloaded signal. - R1 R3 R3 where Vout = voltage level input into counter = resistance of signal wiring and R counter circuitry. R2. 6-5) 15 * R V out = ---------------------2200 + R (Eq. RFT9739 field-mount Local display Signal Return Return Return Return Signal Signal Signal Signal Prover counter Control room inventory device RFT9739 rack-mount Prover counter Return Signal Return Signal Control room inventory device Return Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 51 . The calculated R value can be substituted into Equation 6-5 to determine the available signal voltage. or add a resistor across the input terminals to the counter. Figure 6-2. to limit the output voltage. the voltage that will be applied to the counter input can be determined using Equation 6-5. If this resistance value is known.+ ----. Figure 6-2 illustrates a common application. (Eq. Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices.+ ----. 6-6) 2200 * Vout R = -----------------------------15 – V out More than one frequency counting device can be connected to the transmitter frequency output. all of the frequency devices must accept the same frequency output scaling from the transmitter. which would require three devices wired in parallel. The overall resistance is determined using Equation 6-7. In addition.

therefore. 6-9) Frequency Setting Flow Rate Setting = ----------------------------------------------------.* 60 (sec/min) Flow Rate (lb/min) If the K-factor needs to be changed. then select Frequency output. • To view the K-factor using Prolink software. select Config outputs. go to the Detailed Setup menu. Determine the maximum allowable frequency allowed by the pulse counting device (cannot exceed 10. as shown in Equation 6-9. The maximum scalable frequency output is 10.0. 6-8) Frequency Setting K–Factor = ------------------------------------------------------. because it is capable of being scaled to a user-selected value. For RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. Use whatever time conversion is appropriate. • To view the K-factor using a HART Communicator. and the flow rate setting is in flow units per minute. the meter should be scaled to produce the greatest number of pulses allowable per unit of mass that flows through the sensor.000 Hz). new frequency and flow rate settings must also be determined. the frequency setting unit of measure is Hz (or pulses per second). For RFT9712 transmitters and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3. Input frequency restriction for the proving counter must be kept in mind when scaling the frequency output from the meter. is 60.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination The frequency output of a Coriolis meter differs from the output of turbine meters and PD meters. the Coriolis meter frequency output will be 0 Hz. 52 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . If field adjustment of the K-factor is required the following procedure should be used: 1.* t Flow Rate Setting where t = time units conversion factor The time units conversion factor will vary from one application to the next.000 Hz. (Eq.000 Hz. The time units conversion factor (t). the K-factor must be calculated by hand. but it can be overranged to 15. open the Configure menu and choose Transmitter Outputs. which can be viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. (Eq.* t K–Factor To provide the greatest amount of resolution. Equation 6-8 can be rearranged to determine the appropriate frequency/flow rate settings for a desired K-factor setting. using Equation 6-8. the K-factor is calculated and stored in a register. Determine the maximum operating flow rate. When there is no flow. For example. 2. The frequency output can be configured to produce a selected number of pulses for every unit of mass or volume that the meter measures. because there are 60 seconds per minute.0 and higher. as shown in the following example: Frequency ( pulse/sec ) K–Factor = -------------------------------------------------------------.

If desired. the frequency/pulse output from the meter can be set to any desired value between 0. Whereas turbine meters and PD meters produce pulses as their primary measurements. because sensors operate at different frequencies — smaller sensors operate at higher frequencies. but can be scaled by the user. rather than a constant. The higher the fluid density. calculate a new flow rate setting using Equation 6-9 (which is a variation of Equation 6-8). presents typical operating frequencies for a variety of sensors. based on the following calculation: 2 Digital Update Time = ---------------------------------------------Tube Frequency Response Time/Damping An important aspect of Coriolis meters is that their fundamental measurement is time based. the microprocessor determines how many pulses Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 53 . there are several concepts that must be introduced: • Response time/damping • Low-flow cutoff • Meter zero reads in the total of eight ∆t samples. Calculate the K-factor from Equation 6-8. The frequency/pulse output is derived from the digital measurement performed by the microprocessor. using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. Coriolis meters produce a time difference (∆t) between the right and left pickoff detectors as their primary measurement.1 and 15. In addition.000 Hz. the update time of the flow rate measurement also depends on the damping factor that has been set in the transmitter. Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output To verify proper operation of the meter’s frequency/pulse output. changes in the density of the process fluid will also change the frequency of operation. a simulation test can be performed. Use the rounded K-factor value for subsequent proving calculations. the digital value is capable of updating as fast as every 0. Using the rounded K-factor and the maximum allowable frequency. calculates the average ∆t. Table 6-1. not pulse based. The microprocessor and frequency/pulse circuitry operates in the following fashion.4 Additional Flow Measurement Information In order to better understand the way Coriolis meters process and output the flow rate measurement. Counters that are controlled by the microprocessor take four ∆t samples from the pickoffs during every tube cycle. 5. 6. Based on the frequency scaling. because the number of pulses per unit of measured mass is not a constant value. therefore. larger sensors operate at lower frequencies. page 54. 6. Every two tube cycles. The fluid that flows through the meter over a set time interval is measured and totaled.025 seconds. the Coriolis meter K-factor could be more precisely referred to as a “pulse scaling factor. Using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. using the values determined from steps 1 and 2. In addition. The total is stored in a register. then resets the counters. Confusion often results among those who are accustomed to proving turbine and PD meters. 4. the lower the frequency of operation of the meter. The typical meter operates at 80 Hz. This signal can be used to verify that the frequency/pulse output is interfacing properly with the prover counter. round down the calculated K-factor to a convenient integer quantity. the microprocessor The actual update time will vary from one meter to the next. The update time of the ∆t measurement depends on the natural frequency of the tube vibration. The sampling of the ∆t measurement from the sensor pickoffs is dependent on the tube frequency.” which indicates the value is a variable.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 3. Enter the maximum allowable frequency and the calculated flow rate into the transmitter. To avoid confusion.

so internal microprocessor damping is available to average this signal over time and provide a more uniform output. For a better understanding of these concepts. resulting from flow pulsations and fluid turbulence characteristics. the frequency output of the meter is a reflection of the total flow measured by the meter. the solid line represents the actual flow rate.1 seconds. Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy Although using damping is recommended for smoothing out the raw signal from the meter. the raw flow measurement signal from a Coriolis meter exhibits significant variation.1 is generally not recommended because no filtering is applied. results in a slight lag between an update in the digital flow rate and an update in the frequency output. The lower the tube frequency. This value is a filter coefficient. the dotted line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. which is used to convert the meter’s digital flow rate signal to a frequency output. The signal processing circuitry.0012 g/cc 150 157 130 87 87 55 ρ=0. and is continually being adjusted to provide proper accounting of the total fluid flow through the meter. and any value over 0.1 54 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . are sensed by the meter and this information is reflected in the meter’s output signals. The purpose of this damping is to filter out flow noise or the effects of rapid changes in flow rate.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Table 6-1. the graph in Figure 6-3 illustrates how damping affects the reaction of the Coriolis meter to changes in flow rate.8 g/cc 139 135 110 76 76 41 ρ=0.8. Basically. the response time characteristics of the meter can lead to problems with undersized in-line field provers. Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. and deviations are accounted for and adjusted for in the next time interval. In the graph in Figure 6-3. a value of 0. A damping value of 0 will result in no filtering being applied. the frequency output will lag the change in the digital flow rate by approximately 0. it can lead to problems for some types of measurements. The RFT9739 employs a selective digital software filter to accomplish this. For an instantaneous change in flow rate. For process control applications. the longer it will take for the digital values to be updated. damping is used to provide averaging of the signals over a longer time base before updating the digital values. resulting in output signals that have inherent mechanical averaging.2 uses second order filtering. In particular. Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 ρ=0. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the input.4. without affecting overall measurement accuracy. so their mechanical sensing elements tend to dampen out small scale fluctuations in flow. The flow sensor is extremely responsive to the dynamics of the fluid flowing through the vibrating tubes.1 incorporates first order filtering. Using a damping value of less than 0. The microprocessor keeps track of the number of pulses output versus the total in the register. turbine meters and PD meters have significant inertia. The user-specified RFT9739 damping value can be varied from 0 to 1638.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 need to be output to correspond to the amount of fluid measured by the meter. Localized flow fluctuations and flow noise. The standard RFT9739 damping setting from the Micro Motion factory is 0. Therefore. In contrast.

a 0. which is a factor of the prover volume and the fluid flow rate during the prerun. Event 2 is the first measurement detector switch. which results in a reduction in the flow rate through the piping system. In this example. This meter factor would then be applied to the meter indication to correct its output.1 damping 0.1 damping factor. using the 0. and the dashed line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. the meter is actually measuring correctly. The time between events 2 and 3 is the pulse accumulation period. For the example shown in Figure 6-3.8 damping factor results in an over-registration of counts by the prover counter. Duration of the prover prerun. pulse accumulation from the meter is halted. Event 1 is the launching of the prover ball or the prover piston.000. The meter response time. However. The time between events 1 and 2 is the prover prerun. In contrast. the meter indication is being adjusted to an incorrect value. which depends on the transmitter damping factor and the sensor tube frequency.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 damping factor. 2. Figure 6-3.8 damping Flow rate Prerun Pulse accumulation Event 2 Event 1 Start pulse count Launch piston Poppet valve closed Event 3 Stop pulse count Poppet valve open Time (sec) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 55 . Event 3 is the second measurement detector. For the 0. At event 2.8 damping factor.8 damping value would result in the determination of a meter factor with a value less than 1. by applying it. but it takes the meter some time to make up for the discrepancy between the actual flow rate and the meter indication. At event 1. because the meter will be indicating a higher flow rate than the actual flow rate during the beginning of the pulse accumulation period. The applied meter factor is in error. The danger of this scenario occurring depends primarily on two factors: 1. At event 3. the meter responds quickly enough that its flow indication is the same as the actual flow rate throughout the entire pulse accumulation period.8 damping factor (dashed line). Actual flow rate 0. note the difference in flow indication between the meter with a 0. pulses from the meter begin to be accumulated by the prover counter. the launched object introduces additional pressure drop.1 damping factor (dotted line) and a 0. The overall meter measurement is not in error. Coriolis meter response during proving.

or an RFT9739 transmitter with software version lower than 3. must be determined. Refer to Equation 6-10 for the mathematical implementation of the meter zero. Meter Zero As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. the low-flow cutoff must be set to zero when using an RFT9712 transmitter.0. refer to Appendix E.8. 56 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . due to process variations. a prerun time of approximately 4 seconds will be required. The low-flow cutoff value for frequency/pulse output is the same as the digital low-flow cutoff value. The damping factor should be set to 0. If the flow rate changes at the end of the proving run.1. to provide fast response time. For an RFT9739 with software version 3. If the flow rate falls below the low-flow cutoff value. To prevent this low-level flow from being indicated or totalized. a low-flow cutoff For the meter zeroing procedure. The only problem associated with using a low damping value of 0. If the flow rate drops below the low-flow cutoff value. The standard flow cutoff setting is 0. and the internal digital totalizers will stop counting. The zero value (∆tzero) that is determined is subtracted by the transmitter from all subsequent time difference (∆tflow) measurements. 6-10) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) Meter Accuracy Although meter response time issues can create difficulties in meter proving.05% of the sensor’s maximum full-scale flow rate. (Eq. the flow rate during proving should not fluctuate by more than ±10% during the proving run. The HART Communicator is most commonly used for this task. Therefore. a minimal amount of damping is recommended to average out some of the flow-induced noise.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Duration of the Prover Prerun The duration of the prerun should be no less than 0. Low-Flow Cutoff Due to inherent variability in the signals from the pickoff detectors. a prerun time of 1 second would be more conservative.67 seconds.0 or higher. To view the meter reading under no-flow conditions. it should be kept in mind that the accuracy of the meter is unaffected by changes in damping factor. page 195. the frequency output will go to 0 Hz. which may make it difficult to read a stable flow rate from the meter. should be employed. The key is that the meter should respond as quickly as possible to variations in flow rate. This process is called “zeroing” the meter. and details on assessing the need for rezeroing the meter. the same type of errors in the meter factor determination will result. Using a larger damping factor will require a longer prerun time. The remaining ∆t represents the “true” mass flow rate. The influence of any flow variations at the beginning and end of the proving run will be minimized by increasing the volume of the prover. higher or lower values can be programmed into the transmitter as needed. A damping factor larger than 0. Flow Rate Another consideration is flow rate variation while the meter is being proved. In order to use the factory standard damping factor of 0. However. a “live zero” register can be viewed. The analog low-flow cutoff is unaffected by the digital low-flow cutoff. and can be set independently. even when there is no flow going through the sensor. under non-flowing conditions.1 is the flow rate output from the meter will have a greater degree of variation. to limit meter factor errors.8 should not be used when proving meters with in-line provers. However. the baseline offset between the pickoffs. there will generally be a low-level flow indication from the meter. which eliminates the need for removing the lowflow cutoff. The meter’s flow rate reading can be viewed with any compatible device that communicates digitally with the transmitter. the meter’s flow rate indication will go to zero.

near the proving connections.5 Wiring to Allow Field-Access to Meter Information To provide easy access to meter information in the field using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. Using sealed connectors for wiring terminations is preferred. illustrate how to install this wiring. RFT9739 rack-mount local access terminals. This will allow meter information to be obtained without opening the transmitter housing (and potentially violating system safety requirements). a pair of wires from the transmitter’s primary variable analog output can be routed out of the RFT9739 field-mount transmitter housing through the appropriate conduit opening. It may be necessary to provide access to these connections in a safe area. Care should be taken that electrical wiring and safety codes are not violated. Terminals are installed remotely. If connectors won’t be used. Figures 6-4a and 6-4b. or other type of access box. to provide local access to the rack-mount RFT9739 frequency/pulse output. RFT9739 field-mount local access terminals. be sure the wires are properly labeled.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 6. The ends of these wires can be routed to an appropriate connector. to prevent shorting. In addition. and are taped off or capped off when not in use. routing a pair of wires from the transmitter’s frequency output to allow easy access to these signals for proving is also recommended. Prover counter terminals Local access terminals HART Communicator terminals Sensor cable conduit Power-supply wiring conduit Output wiring conduit RFT9739 terminals Figure 6-4b. Figure 6-4a. terminal strip. Terminals are installed outside the transmitter housing for connecting a prover counter and HART Communicator to a field-mount RFT9739. Local access terminals Prover counter terminals HART Communicator terminals RFT9739 terminals Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 57 .

58 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Single-Channel Proving Counters . . . . . . . . . . . 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 64 65 65 7. . . . .7 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Measurement Device . . . . . .4 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature Measurement Device . . . . . . . Frequency Totalizers . . . . . . . Density Proving Device .2 Proving Computer. . . . . . . . . . .5 7. . . . . . . . . .7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements 7. . . . . . . Pulse Counting Device . . Density Averaging Device. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dual-Channel Proving Counters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 7. . . . . . .1 7. . . . . . Pressure Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

and produce reports that can be output to an appropriate printer.7 • • • • • Proving Instrumentation Requirements When proving a Coriolis meter. the following additional instrumentation may be required: Proving computer Pulse counting device Pressure measurement devices Temperature measurement devices Density measurement device • Density averaging device • Density Proving device A list of equipment manufacturers is presented in Appendix J. • The ability to bring in density from an external density meter as an input frequency. A computational device is required for a small volume prover to perform the pulse interpolation calculations. page 251. They are not typically used with portable proving systems. a digital signal. calculate meter factors and repeatability. 7. required for sufficient accuracy when proving with smaller volumes. These proving computers will initiate the proving run. or a calculated density • A computer that has enough input ports to acquire all of the necessary temperature. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 61 . by way of a density input. pressure. page 91. and does not imply Micro Motion’s recommendation of the devices listed.4. accumulate the pulses from the meter. Flow computer manufacturers also commonly provide a product with proving capability. Features to look for in a proving computer are: • A computer that is capable of performing volume-to-mass proving calculations. The more samples that are taken. or an analog signal. This list is not all-inclusive. The computer inputs must be compatible with the instrumentation outputs. One disadvantage of flow computers is that they are generally dedicated to a single meter or several meters and are used in conjunction with a stationary prover. and frequency measurements. • The ability to sample a number of density readings over the proving run and provide an average density. density. the more reliable the average density reading will be. Companies that manufacture small volume provers often also supply proving computers. temperatures and densities.1 Proving Computer Many companies manufacture proving computers or flow computers. for more information about small volume provers. Refer to Section 8. automatically read pressures. The main advantage of a proving computer is that it eliminates errors associated with using look-up tables and performing calculations by hand. These features make proving computers the preferred method for proving. which can be used to automate the proving process.

3. The pulse counting device must be capable of accepting the frequency output signal from the transmitter. they are used for master meter proving where the master meter and meter to be proved are both connected to the counter. They will display the total number of pulses accumulated from the meter during a proving run. These devices will use the meter’s K-factor to compute and display the mass or volume measured by the meter. single frequency input from a meter. To initiate a proving. inputs are provided for two meters. as in cases where pay-and-check meters are used. Ctl and Cpl correction factors • The ability to accept a 10. however.000 Hz frequency input signal • If a small volume prover is being used. Dual-Channel Proving Counters Dual-channel proving counters operate in the same manner as single channel proving counters. Cps. These devices are commonly used for tank proving applications.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pulse Counting Device • The ability to sample and average temperature and pressure to compute the Cts. Details on the characteristics of this output signal are presented in Section 6. The types of devices commonly available for accomplishing this task are described below. the computer must be capable of performing dual-chronometry time measurement. After a prescribed amount of time the button is pushed again and the counter stops accumulating pulses from the meters. They will accept a 62 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 49.2 Pulse Counting Device The majority of proving applications involve acquiring all of the measurement data manually and performing hand calculations. One of the key components in a manual proving system is the pulse counting device. They can be used to prove two meters simultaneously. a button is pushed and pulses are accumulated from both meters simultaneously. which is used to accumulate pulses from the meter during the proving run. This feature can also be applied to conventional provers if desired. Single-Channel Proving Counters Single-channel proving counters are used with conventional provers. 7. The voltage level from the proving detector switches are used to initiate the accumulation of pulses from the meter. Frequency Totalizers Frequency totalizers that have computational capability and a display. and performing a pulse interpolation calculation. More commonly.

A heat conductive fluid is placed inside the thermowell to transfer heat to the RTD or thermometer. In general. The requirements for pressure measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor. A pressure gauge is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. 7. to correct for the influence of pressure on the prover volume.1°F (0.5 °F (±0. These devices generally use a thermowell inserted in the process fluid. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover (Cpsp) to less than ±0. Temperature measurement might also be required to correct for the influence of temperature variations on the density of the process fluid. Experience with the specific process fluid will be necessary to establish requirements for pressure measurement precision.01%. to correct for the thermal expansion of the prover steel. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. It may also be necessary to correct for the influence of pressure variations on the density of the process fluid. The thermometer resolution should be no greater than ±0. The two most common pressure measurement devices used for proving are diaphragm pressure transducers and bourdon tube pressure gauges. a temperature measurement accuracy of ±2. An RTD or similar device is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. The two most common means of measuring temperature are RTDs and precision thermometers.05 °C) is used when proving meters.01%.5°F would be required. For determination of corrections for the pressure effect on the process liquid at the prover (Cplp). For determination of corrections for the thermal expansion of the process liquid at the prover (Ctlp). Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 63 .Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7 7.2 bar). the required pressure measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in pressure. A thermometer is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. It is commonly required that the pressure measurement be accurate to ±3 psi (±0.25 °C). To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover (Ctsp) to less than ±0. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly.3 Temperature Measurement Device Temperature measurement is required for volumetric tank and pipe provers. Generally. a thermometer with a resolution of 0. the required temperature measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in temperature.4 Pressure Measurement Device Pressure measurement is required for closedvessel volumetric tank provers and pipe provers. a pressure measurement accuracy of ±100 psi would be required. pressure variations have a much lower relative impact than temperature on both the prover steel and process fluid density. A pressure transducer is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. The requirements for temperature measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor.

Proper sampling practices are vital to ensure the sample is representative of the process fluid. or additional temperature and pressure corrections will be required. the calculation method for well defined products. ±0.5 Density Measurement Device If the meter is configured for mass measurement. it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. 64 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The following methods are available to determine the process fluid density: • Calculation of density from pressure and temperature measurements. or some other sampling method.0001 g/cc. a means is required for determining the density of the product at the prover. accurate to ±0. which will be used specifically for density measurement. and can be monitored while the meter is being proved.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7.0005 g/cc. The hydrometer technique requires a fluid sample to be taken from the process pipeline. which raises concerns about proper sampling technique.0001 g/cc. an on-line density meter made of NiSpanC. It is difficult to obtain samples that will represent the actual fluid density during the proving runs. • Hydrometer. correction factors would then be required to correct the density back to the process conditions. can be used. and a volumetric prover is used. However. if the sample contains light-ends and is not properly sealed. Because the product volume will change with changing temperature and pressure. • Sample and laboratory density determination. can be used. • Pycnometer. accurate to ±0. the light-ends will escape to the atmosphere and cause a deviation in the sample density from the true product density. (A Coriolis meter mounted at the prover.0001 g/cc. and the on-line density determination devices are the most practical. this device will generally require a slipstream to be pulled from the process pipeline. accurate to ±0. with an accuracy of ±0. Accuracy depends on instrument accuracy and equation accuracy. or some other sampling method.0005 g/cc. Hydrometers generally do not have sufficient accuracy to be used for mass to volume proving applications. accurate to ±0. The Coriolis meter and the prover must be close enough to one another that the density at the Coriolis meter is representative of the density at the prover. When performing on-line density measurements. For the highest precision.0001 g/cc for NiSpanC. • On-line density from the Coriolis meter. • On-line density from a separate density meter mounted at the prover. accurate to ±0. The device being used for determining density should have an accuracy of at least ±0. Also.001 g/cc. All of the other methods require taking a fluid sample and determining the density of the sample.) When performing on-line density measurements it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. The on-line density devices have the advantages of providing a continuous output signal that represents the actual flowing density. In addition it may be difficult to maintain the sample at the same temperature and pressure as the process fluid in the pipeline. This may create errors in the density determination. Of the methods described above.0005 g/cc for stainless steel. This method is generally limited to products of known composition that have been well characterized for the influence of pressure and temperature on product density.

7. the fluid density can be determined by dividing the fluid mass by the pycnometer volume. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. or product composition exceeds 0. If the total density variation caused by changes in temperature. This is a fairly specialized device. an averaged density should be used for the proving.4. and by weighing the fluid-filled pycnometer.0005 g/cc is available with ELITE sensors and with D600 sensors when used with RFT9739 transmitters. The calibration of the density meter is verified every time the Coriolis meter is proved. which are difficult to clean out of the vessel. on manual proving systems. A pycnometer is the most accurate means of obtaining a fluid sample. It must be kept in mind that any error in the density determination will result in an equivalent error in the calculated meter factor. A container to collect the sample will also be required. but should be available from companies that manufacture prover counters. If a flow computer is being used. The pycnometer has a known volume. Refer to Section 11. a separate density averaging device may be required. to provide an average density during each proving run. Alternatively. A sampling port or sampling loop will be required to get a representative fluid sample. such as crude oil. The averaging of density should be triggered by the prover detectors. This amount of density variation will consume a significant portion of the general repeatability requirement of ±0. However. the density meter’s calibration can be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. or from the digital value viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. A density factor for the density meter is obtained by determining the density of a fluid sample. pycnometers are impractical for many fluids.7 Density Proving Device If an on-line density measurement device is being used. because the meter measures the entire fluid stream.6 Density Averaging Device If the actual fluid density does not remain relatively constant during meter proving. from the display of a Micro Motion density peripheral device. pressure. then a density averaging device may be required. A density accuracy of ±0. and comparing it to the meter reading. and sampling cylinders are used for crude oil.Proving Instrumentation Requirements Density Averaging Device 7 Using the density indication from the Coriolis meter that is being proved eliminates sampling concerns. Pycnometers are primarily used for light-end hydrocarbons. 7. because the sample is collected under pressure.05%. one of the analog outputs. the density measurement of this device must be proved. for more details on determining the meter’s density factor using a pycnometer. The density reading from a Coriolis meter can be obtained from the digital output. Pressure compensation of the density may be required if pressure does not remain constant (refer to page 229). Pycnometers should be returned to the manufacturer and recertified at least once every two years. However. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 65 .0002 g/cc. page 146. density averaging will be fairly easy to accomplish.

66 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . 67 71 72 73 73 74 75 75 75 76 76 76 76 77 77 78 78 79 79 79 80 80 81 82 82 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 84 8. . . . . . . . . . . Consistent Batch Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Proving . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Site Gauge Resolution Versus Tank Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run . . . Consistent Batch Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . Batch Duration Versus Ramp-Up/Ramp-Down Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Buoyancy Correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty . . . . . Scale Resolution Versus Batch Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices 8 8. . Scale Accuracy Versus Location . . . . Ensuring the Tank Volume Is Not Changed . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty. . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . . . . . . . . . . Batch Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Flow Rate Proving Devices . . . . . . . . Batch Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . .2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 67 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Test Batches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Test Batches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Batch Duration Versus Ramp-Up/Ramp-Down Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric Tank Proving . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover . . . . Prover Size Recommendation . . Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leakage Past Valves or Prover Piston Seals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stabilization of the Prover Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Plenum Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Number of Passes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix B). . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . Leakage Past the Prover Ball or Valves. . . . . Repeatability . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover . . . .4 68 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . .3 Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover Uncertainty. . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . . . . . . . . Proper Functioning of Detector Switches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Prerun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Prerun . . . Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Passes/Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Method 3 (from API MPMS 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving Meter’s Volume Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stabilization of the Prover Temperature. . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass. . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proper Functioning of Detector Switches . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 85 85 85 86 86 87 88 89 89 89 89 89 90 90 90 90 90 90 91 94 94 94 95 95 96 97 98 98 98 98 99 99 100 100 100 101 102 102 103 103 8. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Master Meters . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Meters . Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration for Repeatable Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Proving Duration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . .6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 69 . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement . . . .5 Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards. . Repeatability . . . . . Process Fluid Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Fluid Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flow Rate Proving Devices 8 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . Proving Duration for Repeatable Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs. . . . . Number of Proving Runs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 104 104 105 106 107 107 107 108 108 109 110 110 110 110 111 111 111 111 111 113 113 113 114 114 115 116 117 117 117 117 117 117 118 118 8. . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment and Procedures . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 73 Typical sensor operating frequencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small volume prover. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric tank proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outlet piping design for filling tank provers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters . . . Gravimetric proving with tanker truck . . . . Conventional pipe prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down . . . . . . . . . Average meter factors for multiple proving runs . 72 72 76 77 78 79 85 92 93 102 105 112 Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure 71 Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . Double-chronometry pulse interpolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric proving against a storage tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 70 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter Coriolis master meter proving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Figure 8-1a Figure 8-1b Figure 8-2 Figure 8-3 Figure 8-4 Figure 8-5 Figure 8-6 Figure 8-7 Figure 8-8 Figure 8-9 Figure 8-10 Figure 8-11 Table 8-1 Table 8-2 Table 8-3 Table 8-4 Table 8-5 Gravimetric proving with weigh tank. . . 101 Repeatability versus number of passes per run . . . . . . . .

Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure. If the meter is being used to measure mass. if the mass flow and density calibrations are proved. Gravimetric proving is the preferred method of proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement. the prover volume measurement must be converted to mass by determining the density of the process fluid in the prover. However. or a tanker truck (see Figure 8-1b). There are disadvantages in using a weigh tank. The volume measurement is calculated from the independent mass flow and density measurements. page 15. A gravimetric proving system employs a tank placed on a weigh scale (see Figure 8-1a. which is filled and then taken to a truck scale. page 72). based in part on which have the most uncertainty associated with them. Small volume (Compact) provers 5. These methods are listed in order. Therefore. Gravimetric tank proving 2. small volume provers and transfer standards are described in Section 3. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 71 . primarily related to handling the fluid in the tank. Volumetric tank proving 3. there are more options available for proving these devices than for turbine or PD meters. In-line proving devices such as pipe provers would be preferred from a product handling perspective. Mass (Coriolis) master meters Table 8-1 indicates the traceability of the various proving methods back to a fundamental measure. 1. Proving procedures for conventional pipe provers. Volumetric transfer standards or master meters 6. If the meter is being used for volume measurement. the volume will be correct. the simplest approach is to prove the meter’s volume measurement directly against a volumetric prover. from the most preferred method to the least preferred method. the only means currently available for accomplishing this is with some type of weigh tank. Conventional pipe provers 4.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices The proving methods listed below are discussed in this section. Table 8-1.1 Gravimetric Tank Proving Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement. Because a Coriolis meter is capable of being configured for mass or volume measurement. Proving Method Gravimetric (weigh scale) tank Volumetric tank Conventional pipe Small volume(SVP) Volumetric master measure Coriolis master meter Prover Calibrated Against Certified weights Weights and density or Volumetric field-standard test measure Volumetric field-standard test measure Volumetric field-standard test measure Conventional or small volume prover Gravimetric tank Type of Standard Primary Secondary or tertiary Tertiary Tertiary Quaternary Secondary 8. but pipe provers are volumetric devices.

it is more practical to independently prove the meter’s mass flow and density measurements. addresses this option. can the product being removed from the system be accounted for? • Volatile products escaping to the atmosphere raise environmental issues. or to prove the meter’s volume measurement against a volumetric prover.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving There are significant concerns and limitations in diverting fluid from the pipeline into the prover tank: • Volatile products can evaporate during the transfer process. the return piping must be designed so that it will not influence the scale’s accuracy. The advantage of a gravimetric proving system is the meter mass measurement can essentially be compared directly to the prover mass measurement. Flow Sensor Block valve On/off valve Optional liquid-return line Transmitter Pump Scale Figure 8-1b. page 171 (Appendix A). Determination of the process fluid density is not required. Therefore. form A-6. This method would typically be used only when the meter is configured for mass measurement. the option of using a gravimetric prover to prove the meter’s volume measurement is not covered here. Some type of flexible piping joint or seal will be required. If the meter is configured for volume measurement. Required Equipment From Figures 8-1a and 8-1b. If a vapor recovery system is used. Flow Sensor On/off valve Transmitter Truck scale 72 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . • What should be done with the fluid once it is in the tank? Should it be disposed of. Gravimetric proving with weigh tank. • There are safety hazards associated with handling combustible products. However. or returned to the process pipeline? • Are there environmental issues associated with disposal of the measured product? • If the product is returned to the pipeline. it can be seen that the following proving equipment is required for gravimetric tank proving: Figure 8-1a. which can lead to measurement errors. Truck is filled and then taken to a truck scale for weighing. Gravimetric proving with tanker truck.

0 1.072 0. the buoyancy correction is a calculation that employs the ratios of the densities of air.0 0. Buoyancy correction factors.0016 1. The 100 lbs of water is subject to a much larger upward buoyant force than the 100 lb weight.060 0.085 0.1 1. and the buoyant force is inherently calibrated out.4 1.0005 1. can be used for recording data and performing the gravimetric proving calculations. 8-1) Prover Mass * Fb MFm = ------------------------------------------------M meter where = Buoyancy correction factor (see Table 8-2 and Equation 8-2) Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement Fb Proving form B-6.0023 at sea level. Essentially.0009 1. and the weights. ρ fluid Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 73 . The magnitude of this force is equal to the mass of the fluid that was displaced times the acceleration due to gravity at that location.0011 1. for determining the quantity of fluid measured by the meter.0006 1. (Eq.9 1.0007 1.8 1. The displacement of fluid results in the fluid exerting an upward buoyant force on the object. or (2) the process fluid being measured. when proving the Coriolis meter.0008 1.9 0.0007 1. Fb 1. If the scale were only being used to measure items of the same density as the metal weight.045 0. but being used to measure a fluid with significantly different density than the weights. 8-2) ρ air 1 – ---------------- ρ weight Fb = ------------------------------ρ air 1 – -----------. resulting in the scale registering a lower reading for the water than its actual mass. Return line must be isolated so as not to affect the scale reading The only instrumentation required is a display or pulse counting device.065 0.157 0.226 Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor for gravimetric proving is determined from Equation 8-1. Correction % 0.7 0.094 0. Fluid Density g/cc 2.5 1.119 0.056 0. the scale reading is adjusted to match the weight of the certified weights. a buoyancy correction factor (Fb) is applied to the scale’s reading. when calibrating the scale.2 1. To compensate for this effect.7 1. Buoyancy Correction Buoyancy correction is necessary to account for the scale being calibrated with metal weights. The scale is calibrated with the metal weights.135 0.185 0. Therefore. For gravimetric proving. the fluid being displaced is air.6 0. Table 8-2.0012 1. The difference is important when a product of different density is weighed.0009 1.048 0. Equation 8-2 is used to determine buoyancy.0006 1. the process fluid. page 181 (Appendix B). The principle behind the buoyancy correction is that an object immersed in a fluid will displace a volume of fluid equivalent to the volume of the object. no correction would be required.Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 • Weigh scale • Weigh tank • Valving to divert flow and start and stop batches • Fluid return line and pump (optional).0005 1. A 100 lb weight displaces a much smaller volume than 100 lbs of water.105 0. (Eq.0005 1. and Table 8-2 presents calculated buoyancy correction values for a range of fluid densities at sea level.6 1. and the object displacing the air is either (1) the metal weight.5 Note: All values Buoyancy Correction Factor.0019 1.8 0.052 0.071 0.0014 1.3 1.

page 73. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9.0 g/cc. Eprover res = The scale uncertainty due to resolution is determined from the following equation: Scale Resolution E prover res = -----------------------------------------------. 8-3) E = ( Ecal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E buoy ) 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = Certified weights are typically certified to be accurate to within ±0. Total error is calculated using Equation 8-3. page 71. as indicated in Table 8-1.01% uncertainty. which are a fundamental measurement standard.5.01% ) + ( ± 0. This component will generally have less than ±0. The following calculation can be used to determine the appropriate batch size. they may not have sufficient resolution to warrant the additional calculations required to correct for buoyancy. and can result in measurement errors of 0.025% ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty can be improved by increasing the batch size or improving the scale resolution. Eprover cal = The uncertainty from the scale calibration is determined from the measured or accepted deviation between the scale reading and the weights.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving From Table 8-2. the total uncertainty can then be determined as follows: E = ( ± 0. A batch size large enough to result in ±0.025% or better accuracy should be the target. page 125. Scale Resolution Batch Size = -----------------------------------------------0. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical gravimetric prover. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. This will have a noticeable impact in custody transfer applications. The scale should agree with the calibration weights to within ±0.01% ) 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.030% The scale resolution is the predominant influence on the calculated uncertainty. it can be seen that this factor is significant for products of densities less than 1. 74 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . over the range of weight used for calibration.01% ) + ( ± 0. If truck scales are used. (Eq.1% and greater.01%. Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty Gravimetric provers are a primary standard because.01% over the entire calibration range.00025 Ebuoy = The uncertainty due to the buoyancy correction will depend on the accuracy of the densities used to determine the buoyancy correction factor. Using Equation 8-3.* 100 Batch Size This component is minimized by increasing the size of the test batch. they are calibrated against certified weights.

the scale reading should be checked against a set of certified reference weights to verify its accuracy.5 lb. the duration of the proving can be quite long. it will be affected by the local acceleration due to gravity. This calibration is only valid at the location where the scale was calibrated. Equation 8-4 can be used to determine the duration of the proving: (Eq. Whenever a gravimetric proving is to be performed. the scale is calibrated to indicate mass.e. a target scale resolution uncertainty of ±0. which must be considered when performing a gravimetric proving.. In so doing. If a scale is moved to a different location it must be recalibrated. it will give an incorrect indication. Scale Resolution Versus Batch Size As stated in the previous section. determining the correct ratio of scale resolution to batch size is critical to ensure adequate accuracy. a different altitude). A force balance scale measures weight. based on a scale resolution of 0. when the scale is calibrated against the certified weights.5 lb Proving Duration = -------------------------------------------------------0. the scale is made to indicate the correct mass.025%. If the flow rate is low in comparison to the resolution of the weigh scale.Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. and a flow rate of 400 lb/min: 0. If the scale is moved where the acceleration due to gravity is different than where it was calibrated (i. Therefore. or force—not true mass. 8-4) Scale Resolution Proving Duration = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------( T arg et Uncertainty ) * ( Flow Rate ) For example. However.00025 * 400 lb/min = 5 minutes The required batch size would be 2000 lbs: ( 400 lb/min ) ( 5 minutes ) = 2000 lb Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 75 . are: • Scale accuracy versus location • Scale resolution versus batch size • Batch duration versus ramp-up/ramp-down times • Consistent batch size from one test to the next • Evaporation of process fluid during the test run Scale Accuracy Versus Location The scales used for gravimetric proving are typically force balance scales.

Illustrated is the effect on flow rate of the valve opening and closing on the fluid flow rate. viscosity. to ensure the proving results are representative of the meter’s performance under normal operating conditions. The influence of the meter’s zero will have a greater impact during the ramp-up and ramp-down periods. The piping to the weigh tank must be designed to ensure the same amount of fluid stays in the pipe on every test batch. The piping must be leak free. Generally. This process is illustrated in Figure 8-2. When the batch is stopped. It is important that the ramp-up and rampdown intervals are relatively short in relation to the batch duration. pressure and flow rate. Some type of cover or floating interface between the process fluid and the atmosphere may be necessary. One of the concerns of field tank proving is that it will generally require flow through the meter to be stopped at the beginning and end of the batch. This results in a slight measurement error at the start and at the end of the batch. this error is insignificant because the quantity of fluid missed while in the lowflow cutoff range is very small compared to the total batch size. Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down. flow will not be registered below the low-flow cutoff value. To obtain good proving results the following conditions should be Figure 8-2. Excessive evaporation could result in measurement errors. To initiate a proving. In addition. or by creating a gooseneck design (see Figure 8-3) that guarantees the level inside the piping is always consistent.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving Batch Duration Versus Ramp-Up/Ramp-Down Times One of the objectives of meter proving is that the proving is performed under normal operating conditions of fluid density. Batch Size Recommendation From the previous discussion. temperature. there are two factors that need to be addressed in order to determine the required batch size: (1) the scale resolution. This can be accomplished by always draining the piping downstream of the shutoff valve into the weigh tank. a valve is opened and the flow rate through the meter has to ramp up to the desired operating rate. the flow ramps down to zero flow. and (2) the time required to open and close the valves to achieve the desired flow rate. Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run Care must be exercised to ensure the process fluid does not evaporate from the system. 1000 900 800 Flow rate (lb/min) 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Batch time (sec) 76 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it is important to devise a means to ensure the same amount of product that goes through the meter ends up in the weigh tank. Consistent Batch Size When designing the gravimetric tank proving system.

025%. No fewer than three test batches should be performed. • The time to complete a batch should be no less than 1 minute. temperature. Repeatability As stated previously. but may still produce inconsistent batches if head pressure is not sufficient to keep pipe full of process fluid. which is prone to inconsistent draining. Outlet piping design for filling tank provers. it is likely the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. the problem generally lies with the prover system. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0.05% (±0. Transmitter Flow Sensor Acceptable This piping design is acceptable. be evaluated. For Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • Process fluid evaporation • Weigh tank size to weigh scale resolution is insufficient • Coriolis meter frequency output is incompatible with the prover counter • Problem with Coriolis meter mounting • Problem with Coriolis meter These individual sources of poor repeatability must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. sources of the non-repeatability need to Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 77 .Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-3. pressure and composition). If this repeatability specification cannot be met. On/off valve Transmitter Flow On/off valve Sensor Recommended This piping design is recommended because head pressure improves consistency of interface. and the condition that results in the largest batch size should be used: • The batch size should result in a scale resolution uncertainty not to exceed ±0. Transmitter applied.025%) at a single set of operating conditions (flow rate. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. If both meters yield the same type of performance. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. Flow Sensor On/off valve Avoid Avoid this piping design.

it can be used to determine gross errors (on the order of 1% or greater) in the meter measurement. This technique requires tank gauging and strapping. In some cases it is preferable to reconcile the meter readings against large volumetric storage vessels. The larger the damping factor. This permits the transmitter’s flow total register to output all of the pulses representing the total flow that went through the meter to the pulse counting device. a gravimetric proving system used for field applications employs a batching method instead of an on-the-fly measurement. as the transmitter outputs the remaining flow total. the longer it will take for the flow output from the transmitter to settle to a zero-flow indication.8 damping value. Damping Factor Recommendation Generally. typically standard conditions of 60°F and 14. Product flows through the meter into the calibrated volume standard. It is common to see the pulse counting device continue to register flow for a short period of 8. as illustrated in Figure 8-4. However. page 131. When performing volumetric tank proving. refer to Section 10.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving troubleshooting information. As discussed for gravimetric proving. which provides a more stable flow indication from the meter during normal operation than a lower damping value. in a similar fashion as for a gravimetric prover. time after flow through the meter has been stopped. and is generally not precise enough to verify the accuracy of the meter for custody transfer.7 psia. as illustrated in Figure 8-5. there is no effect on the accuracy of the total flow indication. Volumetric tank proving.2 Volumetric Tank Proving A volumetric tank prover consists of a vessel whose volume has been precisely calibrated at a known temperature and pressure. there are significant concerns and limitation of diverting fluid from the pipeline into the prover tank: Figure 8-4. Flow Sensor On/off valve Volumetric tank prover Transmitter 78 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . However. fluid flows through the meter and is diverted from the pipeline into the volumetric tank prover. For gravimetric proving applications the recommendation is to use the factory default 0.

If the meter is configured for mass measurement. Flow Sensor Transmitter Storage tank • Volatile products can evaporate during the transfer process. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by the meter • Precision thermometer or RTD • Pressure gauge or transducer (optional. If a vapor recovery system is used. which can lead to measurement errors. only for closed tank provers) • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement) Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 79 . the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. A prover tank leveling system is generally required to ensure consistent readings from the site gauge used in determining the prover volume. site gauge. The site gauge meniscus should always be read from the same angle to ensure consistency in the measurement. • What should be done with the fluid once it is in the tank? Should it be disposed of. also require pressure measurement to correct the prover volume for pressure expansion. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for volumetric tank proving: • Volumetric tank. or returned to the process pipeline? • Are there environmental issues associated with disposal of the measured product? • There are safety hazards associated with handling combustible products.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-5.2. thermowell. In addition.1. Volumetric proving against a storage tank. If the meter is configured for volumetric measurement. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. and pressure tap (optional) • Valving to divert flow and start and stop batches • Fluid return line and pump (optional) The following additional instrumentation is required: • Display or pulse counting device. page 22. which are used to measure products under pressure. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-5. page 17. the density of the fluid in the prover will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid in the prover and allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. can the product being removed from the system be accounted for? • Volatile products escaping to the atmosphere raise environmental issues. the product temperature in the vessel must be measured to correct the volume of the vessel for thermal expansion. and Section 3. leveling equipment. prior to reading the following details about volumetric tank provers. Sealed volumetric provers.

a volumetric tank prover. and Cplm ) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. Therefore. page 168 (Appendix A). If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same.2 °F and 5 psig is required. For products such as LPG and NGL. known as a volumetric field-standard test measure.Cplp . can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. Ctlm . there is no specific recommendation available. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. Pulse Output Configured for Volume The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-6. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. it may be helpful to refer to Section 9. however. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are 80 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . which provides a common base for comparison.5. these factors are not required. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical volumetric tank prover.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving (Eq. The volumetric field-standard test measure is normally calibrated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure. against fluid mass and density. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. Proving form A-3. Typically. where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . 8-5) MF m BPV * Ctsp * C psp * ρ p = ---------------------------------------------------------M meter essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. page 178 (Appendix B). For products such as crude oil. becomes a tertiary standard. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. 8-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp C tlp * C plp MFv = --------------------------------------------. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation. (Eq. where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The pressure correction Cpsp is required only for closed tank provers. page 125. most volumetric tank provers are calibrated against another reference volumetric tank standard.* --------------------------Q meter C tlm * C plm Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty Volumetric tank provers are a secondary standard if the calibration of the tank volume is determined from the fluid mass and density. Proving form B-3. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement.

Using the values presented above. At best. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to the resolution of the graduations of the site gauge on the prover neck should not exceed ±0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the volumetric tank prover should be within ±0. 8-7) E = ( Ecal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E density ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. (Eq. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. An uncertainty of ±0.8 g/cc. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 81 .005%. Only the temperature correction is used in the analysis shown below. an uncertainty of ±0. because the majority of volumetric tank provers are not closed pressure vessels. Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique.03% ) + ( ± 0.0125% ) + ( ± 0.02%.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.3 and 7.4 Tank Provers. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). * 100 Process Fluid Density (g/cc) where Esteel = Two steel correction factors may need to be applied: (1) Ctsp.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-7) using Equation 8-8.04% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. (Eq.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-7.0001 g/cc can be obtained. and (2) Cpsp. page 63.01%. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.01% ) + ( ± 0. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. and should not exceed ±0.4.02% ) + ( ± 0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. 8-8) Density Uncertainty (g/cc) E density (%) = ± ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------.073%.

The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. which introduces a degree of error.01%. or internal deposits • Site gauge resolution versus tank volume • Batch duration versus ramp-up/ramp-down times • Consistent batch size from one test to the next • Evaporation of process fluid during the test run 82 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-9. All of the terms in Equation 8-9 are the same as those in Equation 8-7. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. page 80. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. If the meter and prover are located close to one another.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. From Equation 8-6. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. or the tables could be misapplied. which must be considered when performing a volumetric tank proving. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. (Eq. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. these factors may not even be applied.02% ) + ( ± 0.039% Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. If the liquid correction factors are used. as shown in Equation 8-6. 8-9) E = ( Ecal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( Eprover res ) + ( Eliquid ) + ( Esteel ) 2 2 2 2 2 A density measurement is not needed for this case.01% ) + ( ± 0. page 81. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. are: • Ensuring the tank volume is not changed by dents. bulging. However. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. For this analysis. the errors can be significant. page 80. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions might be required.03% ) + ( ± 0. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. Using the values presented above. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11.

sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. it will need to have a new waterdraw performed.02% or less. Reinforcing bands are applied to the exterior of the tank. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. the size of the batch is determined by the size of the tank. No fewer than three test batches should be performed. Repeatability As stated previously. It is important to ensure the same amount of product that goes through the meter ends up in the proving tank. or deposits that build up on the interior of the prover will affect the measured volume. Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run Care must be exercised to ensure the process fluid does not evaporate from the system. If one of the meters exhibits Batch Duration Versus RampUp/Ramp-Down Times This concern is the same as for gravimetric proving (page 76). and the bottom is usually concave. The piping must be leak free. and is helpful in reducing evaporation. If the tank becomes dented or deformed. Consistent Batch Size Again. The uncertainty due to site gauge resolution should be no greater than ±0. the problem generally lies with the prover. it is important that the ramp-up and ramp-down intervals are relatively short in relation to the batch duration. the interior of the tank should be inspected. and cleaned with an appropriate solvent if necessary. Site Gauge Resolution Versus Tank Size Having the correct ratio of site gauge resolution to tank volume is critical to ensure adequate accuracy. As stated previously. Proper leveling of the tank and consistency in reading the meniscus are important considerations. Batch Size Recommendation For volumetric tank provers.05% (±0. Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. this concern is relevant to any tank proving system (page 76). Before a proving is performed.02%. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. As stated previously. The prover’s restricted neck minimizes the surface area of the air/fluid interface. Proving tanks are generally constructed to minimize tank deformation. and the piping used to fill the proving tank must consistently contain the same amount of fluid for every proving run. to ensure the proving results are representative of the meter’s performance under normal operating conditions.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Ensuring the Tank Volume Is Not Changed Any variation in the volume of the tank will impact the accuracy of the meter factor. If both meters yield the same type of performance. rust. and cannot be varied as it can with a gravimetric prover. Additional vapor reduction means may be needed. Any foreign material. the tank should be sized to allow a batch of no less than 1 minute in duration. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • • • • • Process fluid evaporation Leakage Tank volume is too small Inadequate density determination Temperature of the tank is not allowed to stabilize • Coriolis meter frequency output is incompatible with the proving counter • Problem with Coriolis meter These individual sources of poor repeatability performance must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 83 . One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. the tank should have a resolution uncertainty of ±0. The volume of the prover should be verified routinely to ensure measurement errors are not being introduced into the proving results. In addition.025%). Excessive evaporation could result in measurement errors.

The fluid in the ball is typically a water-glycol mixture. When a proving is initiated. This fluid may be pumped back into the main pipeline or drained out of the prover and handled in some other fashion. the friction of the ball creates additional pressure drop. 8. Depending on the type of proving system being used. (In general. at relatively low fluid velocities. 84 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The primary advantage of using a pipe prover is the measurements are performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. When the displacer reaches the first detector. However. and flow rate. and is made of an elastomer compound. temperature. which prevents it from freezing. When measuring process fluids that have poor lubricating properties. is hollow and is filled with fluid under pressure. page 131. When a proving run is not being conducted. it is likely the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. for troubleshooting information. friction may cause the prover ball to hesitate as it moves through the prover. it will generally have to be completely emptied of product after the meter proving is complete. When the displacer reaches the second detector. or is used on more than one product. a damping factor of 0. as illustrated in Figure 8-6. there may still be some fluid disposal concerns. which expands so the ball’s external diameter is 2 to 4 percent larger than the internal diameter of the prover tubing. the ball is held in a receiver trap. Refer to Section 10. it causes the detector to trigger the pulse counter to stop accumulating pulses from the meter. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. or “ball”.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover adequate repeatability when proved. The displacer is usually spherical in shape. The detectors are typically mechanically actuated electrical switches. Another advantage of using a pipe prover is the fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. Thus. Therefore.8 should be used. Most pipe provers are only designed to operate over a 10:1 flow rate range. for the same reasons that were discussed for gravimetric proving (page 78). If the prover is portable. resulting in an erratic flow rate during proving. Damping Factor Recommendation A volumetric proving system used for field applications employs a batching method. a displacing device is introduced into the U-shaped portion of the prover. Any leakage past the ball results in measurement error. Detectors are installed in the proving loop. Only the fluid that remains in the prover has to be dealt with. with a very smooth surface. the ball is launched from the receiver and the force of the fluid causes the ball to travel through the prover loop. Flow is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. The quantity of fluid measured by the Coriolis meter can then be compared to the known volume of the prover to determine the meter accuracy. it resembles a bowling ball.3 Conventional Pipe Prover A conventional pipe prover generally consists of piping and piping fittings fabricated into a U-shape proving loop. it will generally stay full of fluid and there will be no fluid disposal concerns.) The sphere. This provides a tight seal. but minimizes excessive friction. The fluid volume between the detectors is precisely calibrated at standard conditions of 60°F and 0 psig by performing a waterdraw against a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure. the detector triggers a pulse counter — which is connected to the Coriolis meter — to begin accumulating pulses from the meter. causing a reduction in flow rate. During a proving run. If the prover is a stationary prover dedicated to a single product. and the fluid flow forces the displacing device to move through the prover.

the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. the product temperature in the prover must be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. page 22. the density of the fluid in the prover will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid in the prover and allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. • Conventional pipe prover. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for proving with conventional pipe provers: Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor for proving with a conventional pipe prover is determined from Equation 8-10. Conventional pipe prover. prior to reading the following details about conventional pipe provers. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow • The following additional instrumentation is required: • Pulse counting device. page 17. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. and Section 3.1. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by the meter • Precision thermometer or RTD • Pressure gauge or transducer • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement) Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. thermowell. In addition. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices.2.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Figure 8-6. page 86. Flow Sensor Flow Block and bleed valve Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Four-way diverter valve Sphere Receiver traps Detector switches Proving counter Bi-directional prover If the meter is configured for volume measurement. Flow Connection valves Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 85 . The equations used are the same as those used for volumetric tank provers. A pressure measurement is also required for correcting for the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover.

5. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical conventional pipe prover. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. (Eq. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. it may be helpful to refer to Section 9. can be used for recording data and performing the calculations for conventional pipe provers. Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty The volume of the prover loop is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover (Eq. 8-10) BPV * C tsp * C psp * ρ p MF m = -------------------------------------------------------M meter where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement Proving form B-1. For products such as LPG and NGL. Therefore. which provides a common base for comparison. page 125. Proving form A-1. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. there is no specific recommendation available. these factors are not required. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. however.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . page 166 (see Appendix A). Ctlm . 86 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters.2°F and 5 psig is required. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation. 8-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MFv = ---------------------------------------------. For products such as crude oil. the pipe prover is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. page 176 (Appendix B). Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor for proving with a conventional pipe prover is determined from Equation 8-11. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. can be used for recording data and performing the calculations for conventional pipe provers.Cplp .

8-12) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E density ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.000 pulses.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. At best.01%. Eprover cal = Eprover res = Ecounter res= Edensity = Esteel = Using the values presented above.041% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 87 .2 Conventional Pipe Provers. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. beginning on page 63.02% of the volume between the detectors.01% ) + ( ± 0. page 81.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover.01% ) + ( ± 0.01%. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. and should not exceed ±0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-12) using Equation 88. Per API MPMS 4.4. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. or ±0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-12.0001 g/cc can be obtained.8 g/cc. The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover ball) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.3 and 7.005%. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. An uncertainty of ±0.0125% ) + 2* ( ± 0.03% ) + ( ± 0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.074%. and (2) Cpsp.02% ) + ( ± 0. an uncertainty of ±0. (Eq.

However. except the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover Uncertainty When Proving Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-13. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. page 86.01%. page 86. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. For this analysis. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. From Equation 8-11.01% ) + ( ± 0.02% ) + ( ± 0. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. 8-13) E = ( E cal ref ) 2 + ( E prover cal ) 2 + ( E prover res ) 2 + ( E counter res ) 2 + ( E liquid ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 A density measurement is not needed for this case. which introduces a degree of error.01% ) + ( ± 0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. If the liquid correction factors are used. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-11. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. the errors can be significant.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01% ) + 2* ( ±0. Using the values presented above. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. (Eq. page 87. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. these factors may not even be applied. or the tables could be misapplied. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.03% ) + ( ± 0.041% 88 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . All of the terms in Equation 8-13 are the same as those in Equation 8-12. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0.

To minimize such errors. because there will usually be severe measurement errors. as discussed in Section 6. Leakage Past the Prover Ball or Valves Any leakage past the prover ball or through the prover diversion valves will result in measurement errors. the proving run should last long enough to accumulate at least 10. Accumulating Enough Pulses Maximizing the number of pulses output by the Coriolis meter during the proving run will minimize errors due to incorrect pulse accumulation. Failure of a detector switch is generally easy to diagnose. which must be considered when using a conventional pipe prover are: • Leakage past the prover ball and/or valves • Proper functioning and alignment of the detector switches • Accumulating enough pulses to minimize errors in pulse counting • Prover prerun is long enough to allow frequency output from the meter to settle to the correct flow rate after the ball is launched • Stabilization of the prover temperature • Erosion or corrosion of the prover that would change the prover volume often replaced without performing a new waterdraw. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect.000 pulses.01%. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the ball and accumulating pulses from the meter.000 pulses from the meter. Leakage past the ball can be prevented by making sure the ball is properly filled to slightly exceed the internal diameter of the prover.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. and the prover must be of suitable volume to allow a proving run that is long enough. From a technical perspective. page 53. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. if there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. The smallest Proper Functioning of Detector Switches The detector switches must always be triggered by the prover ball at the same location to ensure consistent volume indication.3 (see K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination. page 52). The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used.8. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. (See Section 6. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate. Unidirectional provers require a new waterdraw any time the detectors are removed. The switches can become worn or damaged. The problem is that launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. In bi-directional provers. Prover Prerun The prover prerun must be long enough to allow the frequency output from the meter to settle to the correct flow rate after the ball is launched. For enough pulses to be accumulated. a waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a prover detector switch. Most provers are equipped with some means for checking valving leaks.4. Consequently. If a detector switch is replaced. detector switches are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 89 . Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. by employing a double block and bleed valve for diverting fluid from the main pipeline into the prover. the meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. The ball should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure there is no severe scratching or scoring of the prover ball. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. the proving results will be in error. The prerun time must be long enough to ensure that the meter’s frequency output is reflecting the correct flow rate before the ball reaches the first detector switch and the accumulation of pulses from the meter begins.

If this repeatability specification cannot be met. Number of Proving Runs No fewer than five proving runs should be performed. which is beneficial if the process fluid has poor lubricating properties. To expedite this process. the problem generally lies with the prover. Launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. the prover can be coated with suitable materials (such as epoxies.2 Conventional Pipe Provers for details on sizing the prover volume. Stabilization of the Prover Temperature The prover steel must be allowed to complete any expansion or contraction resulting from a difference in the initial prover temperature and the fluid temperature. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • Leaky prover valves • Poor seal between prover sphere and prover piping • Loose or damaged prover detector switch • Prover undersized for the Coriolis meter • Inadequate density determination • Process conditions are not stable (varying flow rate and fluid temperature will have the greatest impact) • Coriolis meter frequency output is incompatible with the prover counter • Problem with Coriolis meter These individual sources of poor repeatability performance must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. Teflon®. Prover Size Recommendation Sizing a prover is a fairly involved task.1. to minimize or eliminate these problems. Refer to API MPMS 4. If the prover experiences erosion or corrosion. Routine recalibration of the prover will minimize these errors.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover recommended damping factor is 0. the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. it may be necessary to group individual proving runs and average them. which requires knowledge about the operating flow rates. the process fluid should be continuously circulated through the prover.025%).05% (±0. In some instances. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. where the prover may be relatively small. It might be necessary to insulate the prover piping to minimize ambient influences. then determine repeatability between the average meter 90 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Repeatability As stated previously. Damping Factor Recommendation Although damping considerations are not significant for tank proving methods. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. Proving runs should not begin until the prover temperature has stabilized. If the prover is subjected to harsh process fluids. the maximum and minimum allowable velocities and the meter’s K-factor. An additional benefit of coatings is they can reduce the friction between the ball and the prover. If both meters yield the same type of performance. Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover Any variation in the volume of the prover will impact the accuracy of the meter factor. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. resulting in meter factor errors.4 (see Number of Proving Passes/Runs. etc. This technique is common for small volume provers and is discussed in detail in Section 8.67 seconds. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. which requires a prerun duration of at least 0. they are a concern with on-the-fly field provers. The response time of the meter frequency output depends on the damping factor set in the transmitter. If the meter’s frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate during the prerun period. As the prover size is increased there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. its internal volume will change. factors. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated.). page 101).

The smallest recommended damping factor is 0.1. the “flag” triggers optical measurement switches. However. The wide flow range allows one SVP to be used for calibrating multiple meters with significantly different flow ratings. is presented in Figure 8-7. in this case a Brooks Compact Prover. and the optical detectors. Key components are the prover cylinder and piston. Although the damping factor will have no affect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter.8.8 is preferred. the poppet valve. When a proving pass is initiated. Because a 0. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different factor. special precautions must be taken to ensure the validity of the proving results when using an SVP. When the prover is in the standby mode or not being operated.2 second prerun is too short for the Coriolis meter to properly respond to a change in flow rate caused by launching the prover displacer.8 can be used. which generally results in provings taking less time.8 damping factor. Its small size makes the SVP particularly suitable for portable installations. The seals around the piston prevent leakage of fluid around the piston as it moves down the cylinder. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved.1 is usually quite conservative. A diagram of a typical SVP.67 seconds. the poppet valve is open and fluid flows freely through the piston assembly. the poppet valve is closed pneumatically and seals against the face of the piston. The meter should be proved first with the damping factor of 0. which requires a proving duration of at least 0. many individuals do not like to use a low damping factor. An SVP is essentially the same as a pipe prover. and the prover prerun time is not known. and eliminates the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. Using the lowest damping factor of 0. When the flag triggers the first measurement switch. sweeping out a volume of fluid. because the flow rate indication from the meter varies significantly. If there is no change in the meter factor between the two different damping value. Therefore.8. the larger damping value is acceptable. and a damping factor of 0. page 92. and additional timing computations are required to minimize resolution problems associated with accumulating fewer than 10. them proved again with the damping factor of 0. prerun times at the maximum rated flow of the prover can be as short as 0.2 seconds. If a damping value of 0. 8. and reduces the time required for the prover displacer to traverse the prover volume.000 pulses from the meter. pulses from the meter being calibrated are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 91 . except it has a significantly smaller volume. which has an optical “flag” mounted on it. Compact Prover is a trademarked name for the small volume prover manufactured by Brooks Instruments. A metal rod. a simple test can be performed. However. Generally. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used.4 Small Volume Prover The terms small volume prover and Compact Prover™ are often used interchangeably. The damping factor should not be set any higher than 0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 The factory default setting is a 0. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. The flowing fluid pushes the piston downstream through the cylinder. a conventional pipe prover is large enough that the prerun will be 4 seconds long. it might be necessary to use a smaller damping factor.1. The primary advantages of a small volume prover (SVP) are its small size and wide flow rate rangeability of 1000:1. The volume of an SVP is on the order of 10 to 20 times smaller than a conventional pipe prover used for comparable service. As the piston sweeps through the cylinder volume. is attached to the piston. If poor repeatability is demonstrated. creating a solid surface.

The optical switches used on a small volume prover are significantly more precise than the 92 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . though not typically as dramatic as with a conventional prover.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Figure 8-7. if the pressure is set properly. Theoretically. In practice. a series of consecutive prover passes are typically performed to constitute a proving run that is equivalent to a conventional pipe prover run. The precise volume of the prover between optical switches is determined by calibration against NIST volumetric field-standard test measures. An advantage of an SVP is smaller test measures can be used for the waterdraw than are required for a conventional pipe prover waterdraw. a pressure cylinder supplies pressure to close the poppet valve and to overcome seal friction to allow the piston to move uniformly down the cylinder. When the flag passes the second measurement switch. Flow Sensor Flow Transmitter Flow Coriolis meter Pressure Pneumatic spring plenum Piston Temperature Poppet valve Proving computer Hydraulic motor and pump Hydraulic resevoir Detector switches Hydraulic fluid Pneumatic spring chamber Actuator cylinder accumulated by a pulse counter. In this particular design. the piston can increase the fluid flow rate. it can decrease the fluid flow rate. the pulse counter is triggered to stop accumulating pulses. the closing of the poppet valve and launching of the cylinder will cause some variation in flow rate. there will be no change in the fluid flow when the piston is launched. Refer to the manufacturer’s instructions for the proper waterdraw procedures. If the pressure is set too high. Small volume prover. Because the prover volume is so small. Finally. This complete cycle is known as a prover pass. the poppet valve opens and hydraulic fluid is pumped into the actuator cylinder to move the measurement piston back to the initial standby position. if set too low.

the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. and the other to measure the time between the leading edge of the meter measurement pulses. 8-14) tdetectors N interpolated = N counter * ------------------t meter or drained out of the prover and be handled in some other fashion. Due to the small size of the prover. This technique uses two counters. The ratio of the two times is used for determining the fractional flow measurement pulses that occurred between the prover measurement switches. To provide acceptable accuracy. it will generally have to be emptied of its contents between provings. The process fluid may be pumped back into the main pipeline Count C Time B A = Time required to displace Volume D B = Time required to accumulate whole flowmeter pulses. (Eq. A benefit of the SVP’s smaller volume is that the product density is less likely to change during individual proving passes than it would be for the longer runs of a conventional pipe prover. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. If the meter is configured for volume measurement. the density of the fluid in the prover will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid in the prover and allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. Count C C = Whole flowmeter pulses counted during Time B D = Calibrated volume of the prover flow tube between detectors Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 93 . which permits small volumes to be used for meter proving. an SVP is a volume measurement device. The calculation is performed using Equation 8-14. the SVP uses a measurement technique known as double chronometry pulse interpolation. As with a conventional pipe prover. If the prover is used in multiple locations. one to measure the time between triggering of the measurement switches. Double-chronometry pulse interpolation. the contents of the prover are much easier to handle than with tank provers or conventional pipe provers. Double chronometry pulse interpolation is presented in Figure 8-8. Therefore.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 mechanical switches used on a conventional pipe prover. and may require thorough cleaning with an appropriate solvent to prevent cross-contamination of products. obtained from the proving counter = Time between the two tdetectors prover measurement detectors = Time between the first full tmeter meter pulse after the first prover detector and the first full meter pulse after the second prover detector Figure 8-8. 1st detector Displacer Flow tube 2nd detector Flow Calibrated volume Volume D Time A This method of pulse interpolation provides better pulse resolution. The smaller size of an SVP makes it well suited to being mounted on a truck and moved from one location to another. a single where Ninterpolated = Number of interpolated pulses determined from the double chronometry calculation = Number of pulses from the Ncounter meter.

A printer is required to produce the report. The product temperature in the prover must also be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. In addition. which contains all of the required proving information. 8-15) BPV * C tsp * C psp * ρ p MFm = -------------------------------------------------------M meter where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for proving with an SVP: • Small volume prover. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. page 17. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report.2. thermowell.000 Hz) for timing measurements. instead of the total meter pulses. The meter mass is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. The requirements for density averaging will obviously depend on the stability of the process fluid density. The equations used are the same as those used for conventional pipe and volumetric tank provers. and the duration of the individual proving passes. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor is determined from Equation 8-15. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. page 22. a pressure measurement is required for correcting the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover density measurement for each proving pass of an SVP may be sufficient if the passes are short enough in duration. 94 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . (Eq. not the individual proving passes. The calculation of the correction factor Ctsp includes a term to take into account the thermal expansion of the steel rod that holds the optical prover detectors. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Proving electronics. (Eq. (2) a high-resolution crystal oscillator (>100.1. 8-16) N interpolated M meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. consisting of (1) a pulse counting device. page 177 (Appendix B). shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. Proving form B-2. as shown in Equation 8-16. and (3) a microprocessor for performing double chronometry calculation • Precision thermometer or RTD • Pressure gauge or transducer • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement) • Appropriate printer to generate proving report There are two differences between this calculation and the one used for conventional pipe provers: 1. prior to reading the following details about small volume provers. and Section 3.

There are two differences between this calculation and the one used for conventional pipe provers: 1. 8-18) N interpolated Q meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical SVP. Proving form A-2. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. page 125. these factors are not required. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. the SVP is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure.5. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. Cplp .2°F and 5 psig is required. (Eq. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. there is no specific recommendation available. 8-17) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MF v = --------------------------------------------. which provides a common base for comparison. however. Ctlm .Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-17. instead of the total meter pulses. Small Volume Prover Uncertainty The volume of the prover cylinder is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures. (Eq. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. For products such as crude oil. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. The calculation of the correction factor Ctsp includes a term to take into account the thermal expansion of the steel rod that holds the optical prover detectors. The meter volume is determined from the interpolated meter pulses.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter= Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . For products such as LPG and NGL. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. which contains all of the required proving information. page 167 (see Appendix A). Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. A printer is required to produce the report. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 95 . as shown in Equation 8-18. Therefore. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. not the individual proving passes.

and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-19. and should not exceed ±0.01% of the volume between the detectors.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. 8-19) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( Eprover res ) + ( Ecounter res ) + ( Edensity ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 This calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. page 81. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.3 and 7. However. An uncertainty of ±0. = Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. 96 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Eprover res = The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover piston) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. At best.0125% ) + 2 * ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.01% Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique.0001 g/cc can be obtained.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.038% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.8 g/cc.072%. Esteel Using the values presented above. and (2) Cpsp.01% ) + ( ± 0. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP.01% ) + ( ± 0.4 on page 63. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. Ecounter res = The uncertainty due to the pulse counter and pulse interpolation calculations should not exceed ±0. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-19) using Equation 88.3 Small Volume Provers.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover.03% (NIST Handbook. the overall proving uncertainty for a small volume prover is: E = ( ± 0. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4.005%. 105-3).01%. an uncertainty of ±0. Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.03% ) + ( ± 0. (Eq.

037% Although the uncertainty calculated for a small volume prover is less than for a conventional pipe prover.01% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. However.01% ) + ( ± 0. these factors may not even be applied. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 97 . or the tables could be misapplied. All of the terms in Equation 8-20 are the same as those in Equation 8-19. For fairly stable products such as crude oil.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-20. If the liquid correction factors are used. Using the values presented above the overall proving uncertainty for an SVP is: E = ( ± 0. which inherently magnifies the effect of any deviations in the prover performance or meter performance during the proving pass. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. page 95. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. For this analysis.01% ) + ( ± 0. page 95. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. 8-20) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E liquid ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 Again. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-17. the pass-to-pass proving results obtained from a small volume prover are typically not as repeatable. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter.01%. However.01% ) + ( ± 0. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. This is due to the smaller prover volume. A density measurement is not needed for this case. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. which will introduces a degree of error. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP.03% ) + ( ± 0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. the errors can be significant. this calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. (Eq. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. From Equation 8-17. page 96. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.

The flag is commonly mounted on a rod made of a steel. Therefore. If the proving results seem inconsistent with previous results. and applying sufficient actuator pressure. If the rod that holds the measurement detectors moves more than the amount prescribed by the manufacturer. Because pulse interpolation is used. the prime sources of uncertainty are the reference period of the clock and the time period used to accumulate pulses from the meter. If a detector switch is replaced. Wear of the seals will be greater with process fluids that have poor lubricating qualities. the time period required for pulse accumulation is only 0. It may be desirable to coat the walls of the proving cylinder with an appropriate epoxy-based compound or baked-on phenolic.000.000 times greater than the reference period of the clock in order to provide sufficient accuracy. which must be considered when using a small volume prover.01% resolution uncertainty. If the number of pulses accumulated during a proving run is less than 1. Any leakage past the prover seals will result in measurement errors. the uncertainty due to the pulse resolution should be less than ±0. For the Brooks Compact Prover. are: • Leakage past valves or the prover piston seals • Proper functioning and alignment of the detector switches • Time period for accumulating pulses is sufficiently long to minimize errors resulting from the reference period of the clock (crystal oscillator) • Prover prerun is long enough to allow frequency output from the meter to settle to the correct flow rate after the piston is launched • Prover plenum pressure has been set properly • Stabilization of the prover temperature • Erosion or corrosion of the prover that would change the prover volume Proper Functioning of Detector Switches The detector switches must always be triggered at the same location to ensure consistent volume indication. launching the prover piston. Leakage Past Valves or Prover Piston Seals A double block and bleed valve should be employed to divert fluid from the main pipeline into the prover. to improve lubricity. The prover piston seals can be checked for leaks by blocking the prover in.25 microseconds. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Precautions Key items that impact the accuracy of the proving. the proving repeatability will be 98 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . the clock frequency is 800. to minimize variations in the flag position relative to the detector switches. so more frequent inspection for leaks is warranted. The time period for pulse accumulation must be at least 20. A waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a detector switch. Any misalignment between switches will result in measurement errors. which provides a means for checking whether any flow is bypassing the prover. the repeatability of the proving will be impacted by the number of pulses accumulated from the meter. the switches should be checked to make sure they have not become loose and shifted their position. the piston seals are suspect. and probably require replacement. which has a very low coefficient of thermal expansion. Even though pulse interpolation is used. The typical optical detector switch is extremely precise.025 seconds to obtain ±0.000 Hz. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. The actual proving time is at least 10 times greater than this value. which corresponds to a period of 1. Accumulating Enough Pulses From the uncertainty analysis performed in the previous section.01%.

Prover Plenum Pressure Some small volume provers use pressure to assist in closing the poppet valve to launch the prover piston. The internal measurement sampling of the Coriolis meter is based on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. (See Section 6. within the frequency constraints of the proving counter. Since small volume provers have such short pass times. the proving results will be in error. This in turn causes the voltage signals from the pickoffs to become “noisy”. However. a flow tube that vibrates at 80 Hz will result in 320 internal samples being taken per second. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. page 100.8. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. This generates random vibration which is transmitted to the sensor flow tube and pickoff detectors. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. A key point to consider is that the Coriolis meter measurement is time based. the less repeatable the meter measurement becomes. a lower damping factor will be required. Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor/Tube Frequency ρ = 0. Table 8-3 shows typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. which requires a proving prerun of at least 0. but will make the meter less repeatable. the better the proving repeatability will be. This is because the number of internal Coriolis meter measurements is limited for short pass times. The shorter the time period for launching the piston. For an SVP. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. a prerun time of 4 seconds or longer is not very common. this can be a serious Prover Prerun The prover prerun must be long enough to allow the frequency output from the meter to settle to the correct flow rate after the piston is launched.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the piston and accumulating pulses from the meter.0012 g/cc ρ = 0. page 53. launching the piston can create significant mechanical shock. Therefore. and Damping Factor Recommendations. To further minimize pulse resolution errors. This does not affect the overall accuracy of the meter measurement. page 103. piston reaches the first detector switch and the accumulation of pulses from the meter begins. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter. The more internal measurement samples made by the meter. when proving times are less than 5 seconds.8 g/cc 159 139 157 135 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 (Hz) ρ = 0. Additional information is presented under Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations.4. the transmitter should be configured to produce the maximum number of pulses possible.1. The meter takes four internal ∆t samples for each vibration period.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 99 . If the plenum pressure is set too high.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 somewhat worse. Therefore. The problem is that launching the prover piston causes the flow rate to change. which will transmit down the pipeline to the meter. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate.67 seconds in duration. Typical sensor operating frequencies. and additional passes are required to externally accumulate more data from the Coriolis meter. Data collected on small volume provers indicates that proving passes of 5 seconds or longer provide good repeatability with three or five passes per run. more passes per run are required. The prerun time must be long enough to ensure that the meter’s frequency output is reflecting the correct flow rate before the Table 8-3.

and Equation 8-22. etc. its internal volume will change. the prerun duration should be at least 0.67 sec onds and Prover Volume Prerun Volume = -----------------------------------------3 we can determine: 1 Prover Volume 60 seconds Proving Flow Rate ≤ -. If the minimum recommended 0. Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations Sizing a small volume prover depends primarily on ensuring the prover prerun time is sufficiently long to prevent errors in proving.1 damping factor is used. ---------------------------- 3 0. which can be used to determine the minimum recommended SVP size for proving a Coriolis meter at a known flow rate. The analysis is based on the dimensions of a Brooks Compact Prover. The prerun time depends only on the flow rate of the process fluid and the volume of the prover. Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover Any variation in the volume of the prover will impact the accuracy of the meter factor.67 seconds 1 minute 100 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which has a prerun volume approximately one-third the size of the prover volume. Plenum pressure shock is more serious with large SVPs (24 inches and larger) than with the smaller SVPs. which is beneficial if the process fluid has poor lubricating properties. The prover temperature must stabilize before proving can begin.). It might be necessary to insulate the prover cylinder to minimize ambient influences. Routine recalibration of the prover will minimize these errors. An additional benefit of coatings is they can reduce the friction between the piston seals and the prover cylinder. If the prover is subjected to harsh process fluids. resulting in meter factor errors.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover problem. Stabilization of the Prover Temperature The prover steel must be allowed to complete any expansion or contraction resulting from a difference in the initial prover temperature and the fluid temperature. to minimize or eliminate these problems. Teflon. Given: Prerun Volume Proving Flow Rate ≤ -------------------------------------------0. the process fluid should be continuously circulated through the prover. which can be used to determine the maximum flow rate when proving a Coriolis meter with a prover of known size. The following derivation results in Equation 8-21. If the prover experiences erosion or corrosion.67 seconds. -------------------------------------. To expedite this process. It may also be necessary to back off this recommended pressure by several psig. It is important to follow the manufacturer’s recommendation for setting the plenum pressure. the prover can be coated with suitable materials (such as epoxies.

five proving round trips. The prerun duration at the maximum flow rating of the Compact Prover is on the order of 0.17 seconds. a proving run is generally a group of passes averaged together. It is recommended to use the largest size Compact Prover available when proving Coriolis meters. gpm (m³/h) 150 (35) 300 (70) 450 (105) 900 (210) 1940 (450) 3640 (850) 5075 (1150) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 101 . 8-22) Prover Volume (units) ≥ 0.05%. Table 8-4. are used to prove a meter with a conventional prover. gal (liters) 5 (20) 10 (40) 15 (60) 30 (120) 65 (250) 100 (400) 170 (650) Maximum flow rate. Special methods for defining the required number of proving runs for SVPs have been developed and are presented in API MPMS 4. Prover Description 8" 12" Midi 12" Std 18" 24" 34" 40" Volume.3 Small Volume Provers. Table 8-4. but can be a single proving pass. The repeatability specification is used as the determinant in ensuring a sufficient number of proving runs are performed to provide the correct meter factor. the maximum recommended flow rate for a Brooks Compact prover is approximately four times less than the prover specification. for determining the maximum flow rate (given the SVP size): (Eq. page 101. Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters. When using Equations 8-21 and 8-22 for sizing small volume provers for use with Coriolis meters. which repeat within 0.033 * Proving Flow Rate (units/minute) Note that “units” can be any volumetric unit of measure.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Thus. is most commonly used. Repeatability is used as an indication of whether the meter and proving system are operating properly. To clarify terminology used in this discussion: a proving pass is equal to one complete trip of the prover piston. Method 3 in Appendix B. By using a larger prover. but is also used to provide confidence in the proving results. lists maximum flow rates for Brooks Compact Provers to provide compatibility to MMI Coriolis meters. flowmeters will generally exhibit unacceptable repeatability when proved with small volume provers using five individual proving trips. there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. 8-21) Proving Flow Rate (units/minute ) ≤ 30 * Prover Volume (units) and for determining the minimum recommended SVP size (given the flow rate): (Eq. Number of Proving Passes/Runs Generally. However. Appendix B. due to the smaller quantity of liquid typically measured with an SVP.

For turbine and PD meters 5 runs of 3 passes each is most commonly used. At the far left of the graph is the data for one pass per run. A series of runs. at 700 lb/min. the number of proving passes required for each proving application will depend on a number of variables: Figure 8-9.9996 0. Each data point is the average meter factor for the three passes. Average meter factors for multiple proving runs. Coriolis Meter Number of Passes The question that remains is. The average of all of the runs then becomes the meter factor to be used for inventory calculation. At least two runs are needed to calculate repeatability. each consisting of a specified number of passes. It can be seen that. The meter factor repeatability between the runs is summarized in Table 8-5 (which presents the repeatability results calculated from the difference between the maximum and minimum meter factors. The same procedure was used for the other sets of data producing: • • • • • 20 runs of 5 passes.0004 1. using Equation 9-10.05% tolerance. is illustrated in Figure 8-9. three or five runs are used.05%. 5 runs of 20 passes. Increasing the number of passes in each group decreases the variation between the group meter factors. as described by Method 3. page 124. The repeatability of meter factors for all of the runs should then fall within the 0.0008 1. and 4 runs of 25 passes. The number of passes per run should not exceed 20. However. 1. for this particular example. In the next set of data there are three passes in each run. Appendix B) Method 3 involves accumulating individual prover passes to form a group (run). Meter factors are then determined for each run.9998 0. Usually. are performed.3. 10 runs of 10 passes.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Method 3 (from API MPMS 4.9992 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 100 Passes per run 102 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .9994 0.0006 Average meter factor 1.0002 1 0. using 10 passes per run results in a repeatability well within 0. These data points represent the individual meter factors for each of the 100 prover passes. The 100 prover passes were divided into 33 consecutive runs of three passes each. 6 runs of 15 passes. how many proving passes are required for each run for Coriolis meters? The technique of grouping proving passes into runs. and then determine an average meter factor for the run. Increasing the number of passes per run results in improved repeatability (D300/12” Compact Prover 700 lb/min). This graph illustrates the results of performing 100 consecutive proving passes using a 12-inch (15-gallon) prover to prove a D300 sensor (with an RFT9712 transmitter).

3 to 5 passes per run will usually be acceptable. and in detail in Section 6. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. damping concerns are far more important for an SVP than for a conventional pipe prover. a damping factor of 0. • • • • • Coriolis meter size Prover size Flow rate Variation in fluid density Coriolis meter damping factor It has been found that 3 runs of 10 passes each will generally provide the best results when proving Coriolis meters. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter.05% (±0. page 53.1 reduces the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short.1 is recommended.052 0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Table 8-5. 15 to 20 passes per run may be required. Repeatability As stated previously. When using an SVP. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • • • • • • • • Leaky prover seals Leaking piping or valves Loose or damaged prover detector switch Prover undersized for the Coriolis meter Incorrect damping factor SVP plenum pressure improperly set Inadequate density determination Process conditions are not stable (varying flow rate and fluid temperature will have the greatest impact) • Coriolis meter frequency output is incompatible with the prover counter • Problem with Coriolis meter These individual sources of poor repeatability performance must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. sources of the non-repeatability need to be Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 103 . Due to the small size of an SVP and the subsequent reduction in the proving prerun time. This method requires an initial group of 30 proving runs of 1 pass each to be conducted.033 0. even with 20 passes per prover run. An alternative method for determining the number of passes required for a particular metering application is presented in Appendix I.016 evaluated. If both meters yield the same type of performance.064 0. the problem generally lies with the prover.4. At flow rates of 50% or less of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. An equation is then used to calculate the number of passes needed. Passes per Run 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 Repeatability (%) 0. Repeatability versus number of passes per run.021 0. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline.025%).13 0. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. At flow rates of 75% or greater of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. page 245. Results from Figure 8-9.023 0. based on the meter factors obtained from the 30 proving runs Damping Factor Recommendations Damping considerations were discussed earlier in this section (pages 99 and 100). Using the damping factor of 0.

Transfer standard meters are used to prove Coriolis meters in applications for which the prover is undersized for the meter. to use a damping value of 0. The test duration will generally be one minute or longer. then proved again with a damping factor of 0. The key point concerning transfer standard proving is that the meter factor for the transfer standard is determined under actual operating conditions for flow rate. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. Dual pulse counters and a precision triggering system are required. The primary disadvantage of using a master meter is that it is an indirect proving method. pressure. A damping factor larger than 0. the larger damping value is acceptable. If there is no change in the meter factor. To use a large damping factor. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. 8. inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved. Master Meters There is a distinction between master meters and transfer standard meters. and fluid composition. The meter factor that is determined for the transfer standard meter removes any inaccuracies associated with the transfer standard meter. and their calibration usually does not reflect meter performance under actual operating conditions. the proving application will have to be evaluated to determine if a larger damping factor can be used.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards If the increased variation in the meter’s flow rate indication is not acceptable. or for an oversized prover. In general. a master meter is generally proved in one location.8 damping factor will need to be reassessed. and the Coriolis meter cannot be directly proved by the prover. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different damping factor. then moved to the site where it will be used to calibrate the meter being tested. to determine a meter factor for the transfer standard meter. over the exact same time interval. a larger damping factor is only acceptable for relatively low flow rates. Master meters are typically used in situations where provers are not available. Transfer standard proving may be necessary when using an SVP. Due to uncertainties in the master meter performance. Although the damping factor will have no effect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. or cannot be installed for logistical reasons.8 instead of 0. Therefore. For example. and the prerun time is less than 0. The proving results are subject to the accuracy of the master meter and the influence of process conditions on the master meter.8 should never be used.5 Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards Master meter proving and transfer standard proving techniques require the collection of pulses from the master meter and the Coriolis meter being tested. master meter proving is only used when no direct proving methods are practical. the meter should first be proved with a damping factor of 0. If the flow rate is increased the 0.67 seconds. a simple test can be performed. temperature. Any 104 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .1. Transfer Standard Meters Transfer standard meters must initially be proved at operating conditions against either a conventional pipe prover or small volume prover. The transfer standard is used as a means to pass along the prover’s calibration to the Coriolis meter being tested.1. the conditions used for proving the master meter are usually different from the conditions under which the master meter is used to prove the test meter. Master meters are generally calibrated in a laboratory environment.8. One of the drawbacks of master meter proving is.

the fluid viscosity and the operating flow rate must be the same when the master meter is proved and when the master meter is used to prove the meter under test. Turbine meters are primarily affected by variations in flow profile. For the rest of this discussion. The volumetric meters that are used as master meters are positive displacement meters and turbine meters. the term master meter will be used to describe both transfer standard meters and master meters. The master meter must be proved in the same fashion as any meter.3. The flow conditioner and turbine meter should be fabricated into an integral meter section. If the turbine master meter will be moved from the site where it is being calibrated to the site where the inventory meter is located. Refer to Section 3. it is always preferable to prove the Coriolis meter directly against the prover. volumetric flow rate is determined from the fluid velocity. for an overview of the applicable proving procedures. A positive displacement meter is a direct volume measurement device. However. Minimum pulse requirements. and is then immediately used to prove the Coriolis meter under test. Flow Sensor Block and bleed valve Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis test meter Compact prover Counter 1 Gate Counter 2 Gate Start/ stop circuit Two-channel pulse counter Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 105 . To prevent slippage. Proving Equipment and Procedures The equipment and procedures for master meter proving are essentially the same as for transfer standard proving. which will impact the accuracy of the meter. a transfer standard meter is proved against an SVP to determine a meter factor. In this example. page 30. This technique eliminates the uncertainty associated with proving the meter at one location and moving to a different site. Turbine meters are velocity measurement devices. Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter. The primary concern for positive displacement meters is slippage. which can be moved from one location to the next. such as accumulating 10.000 Figure 8-10.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards 8 A transfer standard proving is illustrated in Figure 8-10. fluid viscosity and flow rate. a flow conditioner should be used upstream of the turbine in both locations. except that a conventional or small volume prover must be used with the transfer standard meter.

the Coriolis meter’s measured volume can be compared directly to the master meter’s volume measurement. and (2) when the proving is initiated. page 30. because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. the density of the fluid at the master meter will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid that went through the master meter. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal. and flow rate. the uncertainty from the master meter is not the accuracy specification for the master meter. to allow comparison to the Coriolis meter mass measurement. which cover specific details about master meter proving. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer. the fluid contained within the prover must be returned to the pipeline or be disposed of in some manner. Therefore. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. The master meter measures actual volume. • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). must be met. Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques.01% must be obtained.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards pulses for a conventional pipe prover. • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement). The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods.) If the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. When a conventional prover is used. There are two primary advantages to master meter proving: (1) the duration of the proving can be any length of time. longer proving times will improve the results. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. so no additional temperature or pressure measurements are required to correct for thermal or pressure expansion of the steel. Also. but the repeatability of the master meter proving results. The volume of fluid contained in the metering section is minimal. However. at least two consecutive proving runs that agree to within ±0.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. and might be required to correct to the same reference conditions if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. as is required for provers and tank standards. if the master meter is used as a transfer standard meter in conjunction with a conventional pipe prover or SVP. prior to reading the following sections. (However. temperature. The uncertainty associated with the master meter is minimized by proving the meter. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for master meter proving: • Master meter • Valving to divert flow • Prover (needed only when performing transfer standard proving) The following additional instrumentation is required: • Dual pulse counting device. temperature and pressure indications are useful in ensuring that process conditions are stable. 106 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in a ±0. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter.3.

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

8

**Meter Factor Calculation
**

The meter factor equation depends on whether the Coriolis meter is configured for mass or volume measurement.

Proving form B-4, page 179 (Appendix B), can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric master meter proving calculations.

**Pulse Output Configured for Mass
**

The mass meter factor when performing master meter proving is determined from Equation 8-23. (Eq. 8-23)

MF master * Q master * ρ master MF m = -----------------------------------------------------------------------M meter

**Pulse Output Configured for Volume
**

The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-24. (Eq. 8-24)

MF master * Q master C tlp * C plp MF m = ---------------------------------------------- * -------------------------Q meter C tlm * C plm

where

MFm = The meter factor for the master meter is determined from proving the master meter. The master meter’s meter factor should be determined under actual operating conditions, or conditions that are representative of operating conditions, with a flow rate that is within 10% of the expected operating flow rate. If the flow rate has the possibility of varying by more than 10%, then meter factors should be determined over the anticipated range of operating flow rates. The master meter volume measurement is obtained from dividing the pulses accumulated from the meter by the master meter K-factor. The density at the master meter is obtained by one of the means discussed in Section 7.5, page 64. The Coriolis meter mass measurement is obtained by dividing the pulses accumulated from the meter by the Coriolis meter K-factor.

where

Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement

The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp , Cplp , Ctlm, , and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions, which provides a common base for comparison. The factors Ctlp and Cplp refer to the master meter, which is the device being used to prove the Coriolis meter. If the temperature and pressure at the master meter and Coriolis meter are essentially the same, these factors are not required. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the master meter and the Coriolis meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. For products such as LPG and NGL, it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0.2°F and 5 psig is required. For products such as crude oil, a larger tolerance is generally acceptable; however, there is no specific recommendation available. Proving form A-4, page 169 (Appendix A), can be used for recording data and performing the master meter proving calculations.

Qmaster =

ρmaster =

Mmeter =

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

107

8

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

**Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty
**

The volume measured by the transfer standard meter is typically determined by using a conventional pipe prover or small volume prover as a reference. Therefore, the volumetric master meter is a quaternary reference to a fundamental measure. The following analysis represents the error associated with using the transfer standard meter as a transfer standard by initially proving it against a small volume prover. If the transfer standard meter were calibrated under conditions other than the actual operating conditions, the uncertainty would be much greater because the change in process conditions could shift the calibration of the meter. If the meter were proved under conditions other than the actual process conditions, the uncertainty would be difficult to characterize. The uncertainty in the proving depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9.5, page 125, for an overview of the uncertainty calculation.

**Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement
**

The proving uncertainty in using a transfer standard to prove the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement is determined from Equation 8-25. (Eq. 8-25)

E = ( Ecal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( Eprover res ) + ( Ecounter res ) + ( E density )

2 2 2 2 2

where

Ecal ref = Because the uncertainty being determined is for transfer standard proving, the uncertainty of the calibration reference will be the uncertainty of the prover used for proving the transfer standard meter. The uncertainty for a small volume prover can be obtained using Equation 8-20, page 97. The overall uncertainty of the calibration reference is ±0.037%. Per API MPMS 4.5 Master-Meter Provers, the average meter factor of at least two consecutive meter proves must agree to within ±0.01%. This error component includes the error due to the master meter, and the master meter factor. This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. At least 10,000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10,000 pulses, or ±0.01%. This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the Coriolis meter being proved. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10,000 pulses, or ±0.01%. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. At best an uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc can be obtained. An uncertainty of ±0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-25) using Equation 8-8, page 81.

Eprover cal =

Eprover res =

Ecounter res=

Edensity

=

Using the values presented above, and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0.8 g/cc, the overall proving uncertainty for a volumetric transfer standard meter is:

108

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

8

E =

**( ± 0.037% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0.0125% )
**

2 2 2 2

2

= ± %0.043

Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.075%. Again, the importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. Keep in mind that the uncertainty calculated here is for a master meter being used as a transfer standard. If the master meter was not proved under actual conditions, immediately prior to the proving of the Coriolis meter, then the uncertainty calculation would have to include an additional component to account for the master meter’s uncertainty specification. This would make the total uncertainty significantly greater.

**Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement
**

The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-26. (Eq. 8-26)

E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( Eliquid )

2 2 2 2 2

A density measurement is not needed for this case. However, liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in meter factor Equation 8-24, page 107. All of the terms in Equation 8-26, are the same as those in Equation 8-25, except for the liquid correction term:

Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm, which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter, and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm, which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the transfer standard meter and the Coriolis meter. From Equation 8-24, page 107, it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors.

Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. If the meters are located close to one another, these factors may not even be applied, which introduces a degree of error. If the liquid correction factors are used, there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values, or the tables could be misapplied. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure, the errors can be significant. For fairly stable products such as crude oil, the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01%. Using the values presented above, the overall proving uncertainty is:

E = ( ± 0.037% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% )

2 2 2 2

= ± 0.041%

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

109

8

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

Keep in mind that the uncertainty calculated here is for a master meter being used as a transfer standard. If the master meter was not proved under actual conditions, immediately prior to the proving of the Coriolis meter, then the uncertainty calculation would have to include an additional component to account for the master meter’s uncertainty specification. This would make the total uncertainty significantly greater.

scaleable, as discussed in Section 6.3, page 49, it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10,000 pulses.

**Proving Duration for Repeatable Output
**

The proving duration must be long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter. Collecting 10,000 pulses from a Coriolis meter may not be sufficient to ensure that the proving results are repeatable. Because the frequency output can be scaled to a maximum 10,000 Hz output, it is usually quite easy to collect 10,000 pulses, even on proving runs of very short duration. An advantage of master meter proving is the fact that the proving time can be set to any desired value. A proving run time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are generally not recommended, because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. The proving duration should be no shorter than one minute when performing master meter proving.

Precautions

Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving, which must be considered when using a volumetric master meter, are: • Enough pulses are accumulated to minimize errors in pulse counting • Proving duration is long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter • Changes in process fluid conditions (temperature, pressure, flow rate, and product composition), which may create master meter measurement errors

**Accumulating Enough Pulses
**

Maximizing the number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run will minimize errors due to incorrect pulse accumulation. To minimize errors in pulse accumulation, a minimum of 10,000 pulses must be accumulated from both the master meter and the Coriolis meter during the proving run. If there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving, the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0.01%. For enough pulses to be accumulated, the Coriolis meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly, and the proving duration must be long enough to allow a sufficient number of pulses to be accumulated. Because the frequency output of the meter is

**Process Fluid Conditions
**

If the process fluid conditions change while the Coriolis meter is being proved, the results of the proving are questionable because the change in conditions could have affected the accuracy of the master meter. If the process conditions change, the master meter should be reproved at the new conditions. If the meter factor of the master meter changes, the new meter factor should be used in the proving calculations. Although pressure and temperature measurements are not directly required to perform the proving computations, these variables should be monitored during the proving to ensure the proving results are valid.

110

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Coriolis Master Meter

8

**Proving Duration Recommendation
**

A proving duration of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. When using a master meter, the proving should never be less than one minute in duration. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are generally not recommended, because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times.

• Problem with Coriolis meter • Problem with master meter These individual sources of poor repeatability performance must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. Problems can often be identified by using redundant Coriolis meters in the pipeline. If both test Coriolis meters yield the same type of performance, the problem generally lies with the master meter. If one of the Coriolis test meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved, it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other Coriolis meter.

**Number of Proving Runs
**

No fewer than three proving runs should be performed.

Repeatability

The typical repeatability criteria is a total range of 0.05% (±0.025%). If this repeatability specification cannot be met, sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • Leaking piping or valves • Inadequate density determination • Process conditions are not stable (varying flow rate and fluid viscosity will have the greatest impact on the volumetric master meters) • Coriolis meter or master meter frequency output is incompatible with the prover counter

**Damping Factor Recommendation
**

Because no prover displacer is launched, which would cause changes in the fluid flow rate, damping considerations are not typically of concern when performing master meter proving. In addition, the proving duration is generally long enough that the effect of any fluctuations in flow rate at the beginning and end of the proving run are minimized by the large quantity of fluid that is measured. Therefore, the recommended damping factor is 0.8 (the factory-set default value), which provides a stable output signal. Damping factors larger than 0.8 are not recommended.

**8.6 Coriolis Master Meter
**

As with volumetric master meters, Coriolis master meters have the problem of being calibrated under conditions other than the actual operating conditions. Therefore, when a Coriolis meter is used for proving a meter in the field, there is always the concern of how the actual operating conditions may affect the master meter. Any inaccuracies in the master meter will be passed on in the meter factor determined for the meter being proved. The concern about the influence of actual operating conditions on a master meter is only overcome when the master meter is used as a transfer standard, by first proving it against a prover and then using it to prove the Coriolis meter under test. Transfer standard proving is recommended in applications for which the prover is undersized for the Coriolis meter and the proving prerun time would be too short to obtain accurate proving results. Using a Coriolis meter as a transfer standard meter is not generally an option, because the response time of the Coriolis master meter would not be significantly different from the response time of the Coriolis meter that is being tested. If the Coriolis master meter could be proved directly against the prover, then the test meter could be proved directly against the prover. Coriolis master meters are well suited for process control applications, where they are often used for ISO 9000 verification of meter

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

111

calibrating the master meter on water or some other laboratory fluid is sufficient. or hoses. Coriolis meters of the same size and model tend to experience the same degree of influence from process conditions. Therefore. ELITE meters are recommended for master meters because of their high accuracy and greater immunity to varying process conditions. Flow Sensor Block and bleed valve Transmitter Sensor Coriolis test meter Start/ stop circuit Two-channel pulse counter Transmitter Gate Counter 1 Gate Counter 2 Coriolis master meter 112 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . which have an overlap in flow ratings. and the procedure is easy to implement. The cart must be rigid enough to minimize variations in piping stresses. calibrating the meter under actual operating conditions is not necessary. Figure 8-11 illustrates a Coriolis master meter proving installation. Flexible proving connections. meters of different size and model will exhibit different effects on performance with varying process conditions. One method of reducing concerns about influences on the Coriolis master meter’s performance is to use a master meter cart with multiple master meters. The Coriolis test meter can be proved against Coriolis master meters of different sizes. In these applications. and can be moved from one proving application to the next.05% of one another in order for the proving results to be considered to be valid. should sufficiently isolate the meters from transferring vibration to one another. Coriolis master meter proving. the goal is to verify consistency in meter performance from one proving to the next. using one Coriolis meter to prove another Coriolis meter is the simplest and most straightforward method for proving.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter performance. Dual pulse counters and a precision triggering system are required. absolute accuracy is not as critical as it is with custody transfer applications. Looking past the concerns about the effect of actual process conditions on the Coriolis master meter. The meter factors determined by using two different Coriolis master meters should agree to within 0. Figure 8-11. The Coriolis master meter can be mounted on a moveable cart with suitable proving connections. However. The calculations are greatly simplified. Using a Coriolis master meter requires pulses from the master meter and the test meter to be collected over the exact same time interval.

concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. Coriolis meters can measure both mass and volume. An external density measurement is not required. Instead. Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques. temperature. The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in ±0. (Eq. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for volume measurement. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for mass measurement.0000 as possible. longer proving times will improve the results. a meter factor for the master meter is generally not used. The volume of fluid contained in the master meter piping is minimal. individual meter factors can be determined at different flow rates. Finally. and flow rate. these process measurements are useful in ensuring stable conditions at both the test meter and the master meter. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. page 180 (Appendix B). The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. corresponding as closely to a meter factor of 1. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for mass measurement. can be used for recording data and performing the proving calculations for a Coriolis master meter. the master meter is calibrated to provide an extremely linear output. Also. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor for master meter proving is determined from Equation 8-27. To reduce the meter’s uncertainty. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 113 . to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. The mass of both the master meter and the test meter are determined by dividing the pulses accumulated from the meter by their respective K-factors. The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. (2) When the proving is initiated. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 There are two primary advantages to master meter proving: (1) the duration of the proving can be any length of time. because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). Since Coriolis meters are very linear-flow measurement devices. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for volume measurement. • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. Proving form B-5.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from either the Coriolis master meter or the Coriolis test meter. 8-27) MF master * M master MFm = -----------------------------------------------M meter where Mmaster = Mass measured by the Coriolis master meter Mmeter = Mass measured by the Coriolis meter being tested Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for proving with a Coriolis master meter: • Coriolis Master meter • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Dual pulse counting device. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer. Although temperature and pressure measurements are not required for calculation purposes.

5. Ctlm . is included for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volume measurement against a coriolis master meter configured for mass measurement. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. page 169 (Appendix A). This option would not commonly be used. The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp .* -----------------------------Q meter C tlm * C plm where Qmaster = Volume measured by the Coriolis master meter Qmeter = Volume measured by the Coriolis meter being tested Proving form A-4. however. Because the Coriolis master meter will generally be calibrated under conditions other than the actual operating conditions. can be used for recording data and performing the proving calculations for any volumetric meter. The uncertainty calculations include an additional term for the meter’s basic uncertainty specification for mass and density measurements as appropriate. The uncertainty in the proving depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the master meter and the test meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. 114 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Ctlm and Cplm refer to the meter being tested. The volume of both the master meter and the meter under test are determined by dividing the pulses accumulated from the meter by their respective K-factors. If a gravimetric prover is used. 8-28) MFmaster * Q master Ctlp * C plp MFv = -----------------------------------------------. in this case the Coriolis master meter. For products such as LPG and NGL.2°F and 5 psig is required. form A-5.Cplp . and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. page 170. so it is not discussed in detail in this section.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-28. If the master meter is configured for volume measurement. (Eq. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. page 125. which is proved against a gravimetric prover. a conventional pipe prover or SVP can be used to prove the master meter. which provides a common base for comparison. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. the four liquid correction factors are not required. For products such as crude oil. there is no specific recommendation available. including a Coriolis master meter configured for volume measurement. An additional proving form. The following analysis represents the error associated with a Coriolis master meter. Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty The mass measured by the Coriolis master meter is typically determined by using a gravimetric prover in a laboratory as a reference. If the temperature and pressure at the master meter and test meter are essentially the same. The factors Ctlp and Cplp refer to the prover. the uncertainty in the measurement is more difficult to characterize. the Coriolis master meter will be a secondary reference to a fundamental measure.

page 202. other than as a transfer standard. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. These meter factors should be documented and applied properly when proving meters in the field with the master meter. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. A minimum of two runs should be conducted at each flow rate when calibrating the master meter.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty in using a Coriolis master meter to prove the Coriolis test meter’s mass measurement is determined from Equation 8-29.030% could typically be expected. as explained previously. and impact on uncertainty. or ±0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 115 .01%. this can be improved by improving the ratio of scale resolution to proving batch size.108% The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods.025 ) + ( ± 0. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the master meter’s mass flow measurement. (Refer to Section E. The meter’s zero stability must be taken into account.01% ) + ( ± 0.10% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. Eprover res = This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. different meter factors may have to be used for different flow rates.030% ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. a value of ±0. page 74. (Eq. However. The value of ±0. Eprover cal = The uncertainty due to this component will be very subjective. For ELITE meters.9. a value of ±0.000 pulses.10% is only applicable in the meter’s upper flow range. for master meter zero consideration.000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter. or ±0. At least 10. and is determined by how closely the master meter agrees with the gravimetric prover when it is calibrated.025% for all of the proving runs conducted.01%. 8-29) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( Eprover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E master ) 2 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = The uncertainty of the calibration reference is the uncertainty of the gravimetric prover. The master meter should be repeatable to within ±0.10% is used. From Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. Ecounter res= This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the test meter.000 pulses.01% ) + ( ± 0.) The overall proving uncertainty when using a Coriolis master meter would be on the order of: E = ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. In order to meet this recommendation.

The ELITE meter density uncertainty is ±0. Equation 8-8. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. this equates to an uncertainty of ±0. (Refer to Section E.8 g/cc. or the tables could be misapplied. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.9. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the Coriolis master meter’s mass flow measurement and density measurement. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. For the density uncertainty. For a fluid with a density of 0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter.01% ) + ( ± 0. page 202. However. the errors can be significant.118%. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. page 115. If the liquid correction factors are used. From Equation 8-28. for master meter zero considerations and impact on uncertainty. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors.) For ELITE meters. page 114. which introduces a degree of error. All of the terms in Equation 8-30 are the same as those in Equation 8-29. as shown in meter factor Equation 8-28.025 ) + ( ± 0. a value of ±0. page 114. The mass flow and density uncertainties are combined using the square root of the sum of the squares method to obtain a volume measurement uncertainty of ±0.1% is used for the mass measurement component. (Eq. these factors may not even be applied. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required. is used.01% ) + ( ± 0. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. 8-30) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( Eliquid ) + ( Emaster ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 A density measurement is not needed for this case.01% ) + ( ± 0. except for the liquid correction term and the master meter uncertainty term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. If the meters are located close to one another.01%.0625%. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the Coriolis master meter and the Coriolis test meter. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. page 81.0005 g/cc.126% 116 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Using the values presented above.118% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.030% ) + ( ± 0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-30. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. the overall proving uncertainty is: E = ( ± 0. since both of these measurements are used to provide the volume measurement. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant.

page 239. which must be considered when using a Coriolis master meter. A proving run time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. a minimum of 10. The proving duration should be no shorter than one minute when performing master meter proving. Appendix F.000 pulses. Recommended Proving Duration A proving time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. depending on the facilities available to prove the Coriolis master meter. This may not be possible.01%. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. the process temperature and pressure at the master meter should be monitored. the proving should never be less than one minute in duration. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times.000 pulses from a Coriolis meter may not be sufficient to ensure that the proving results are repeatable. are: • Accumulating enough pulses to minimize errors in pulse counting • Proving duration is long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter • Process fluid conditions which may create Coriolis master meter measurement errors Process Fluid Conditions It is always preferable to prove the master meter under the same conditions that will be experienced in the process pipeline during the proving of the Coriolis test meter. discusses volume. 10. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 117 .3. If there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. other than as a transfer standard. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. If the master meter cannot be proved under normal operating conditions. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. provides a discussion on influences on the Coriolis meter’s mass measurements. as discussed in Section 6.000 pulses. When using a master meter. Because the frequency output can be scaled to a maximum 10. To minimize errors in pulse accumulation. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. it is important that the master meter performance be well characterized.000 pulses must be accumulated from both the master meter and the test meter during the proving run. Appendix G. the test meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. page 223. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. Proving Duration for Repeatable Output The proving duration must be long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter. and appropriate compensations for variations in process conditions be used. An advantage of master meter proving is the fact that the proving time can be set to any desired value.000 Hz output. For enough pulses to be accumulated. it is usually quite easy to collect Number of Proving Runs No fewer than three proving runs should be performed. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. and the proving duration must be long enough to allow a sufficient number of pulses to be accumulated. page 49. Collecting 10.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods. Any inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved. even on proving runs of very short duration. and Appendix H. page 205. Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. discusses density. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. In order to track the impact of process conditions on the performance of the master meter. Accumulating Enough Pulses Maximizing the number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run will minimize errors due to incorrect pulse accumulation. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended.

the proving duration is generally long enough that the effect of any fluctuations in flow rate at the beginning and end of the proving run are minimized by the larger quantity of fluid that is measured.8 are not recommended. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. If one of the test meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. 118 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Possible sources of poor repeatability include: • Process conditions are not stable • Coriolis meter frequency output is incompatible with the prover counter • Problem with Coriolis test meter • Problem with Coriolis master meter These individual sources of poor repeatability performance must be investigated to determine the proper course of action. Therefore. which would cause changes in the fluid flow rate.05% (±0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Repeatability The typical repeatability criteria is a total range of 0.8 (the factory-set default value). If this repeatability specification cannot be met.025%). Damping factors larger than 0. Problems can often be identified by using redundant metering in the pipeline. Damping Factor Recommendation Because no prover displacer is launched. In addition. damping considerations are not typically of concern when performing master meter proving. If both test meters yield the same type of performance. the problem generally lies with the master meter. the recommended damping factor is 0. which provides a stable output signal.

. . . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . .4 Volume Meter Factor . .3 9. . . . . . . . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 129 127 128 9.7 Figure 9-1 Table 9-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 119 . . . . . . . . . .1 9.2 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0. . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations . . . . Meter Configured for Volume. Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Trend Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend Chart Data . . . . .0 or Higher . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Uncertainty . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Proving Calculations Summary 9. . . . . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

120 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

* -------------------------Q meter C tlm * C plm where BPV = Base prover volume Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement Equation 9-1 is used when the meter is configured for volume measurement and is being proved against a volumetric proving device: volumetric tank. (Eq. Cplp. a batch totalizing device can be used. correction factors (Ctsp and Cpsp) must be applied to obtain the true volume of the prover.1 Volume Meter Factor The basic volume meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-1. 9-2) BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp C tlp * C plp MF v = -----------------------------------------. When performing provings against a tank prover. Ctlm. Proving calculations for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. For definitions of the terms and symbols used in the following sections. 9-1) Prover Volume MFv = -----------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Volume (Eq. and Cplm) are needed to correct the volume of the liquid at the two locations to the same reference conditions. as shown in Equation 9-3. page 49. or volumetric master meter. Equation 9-2 is the standard proving equation used for all volumetric flowmeters. The calculations used depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors are not used for volumetric master meters. 9-3) Coriolis Meter Pulses Q meter = ----------------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6. corrections factors (Ctlp. The Coriolis meter volume measurement (Qmeter) in Equation 9-1 is typically determined from a frequency totalizing device. conventional prover. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. small volume prover (SVP). refer to Terminology and Mathematical Variables on page xxi. This value can then be entered directly into Equations Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 121 . Because the volume of these proving devices varies with changes in process temperature and pressure. (Eq. In addition. 9. the objective is to compare the quantity of product measured by the prover to the quantity of product measured by the meter.3. if the process conditions are not the same at the meter and the prover. The total number of pulses accumulated is divided by the meter’s volume K-factor to determine the volume of fluid measured by the Coriolis meter.9 Proving Calculations Summary When determining the meter factor for a Coriolis meter. A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter volume instead of the number of pulses accumulated.

Chapter 11. page 139. For additional information.9 Proving Calculations Summary Volume Meter Factor 9.2 Mass Meter Factor The basic mass meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-4. Accurate determination of the density is critical.1. refer to Using a Density Meter at the Prover. and the density at the prover can be considered to be the same as the density at the meter. the fluid density at the prover must be determined. The density measurement device should be located as close to the prover as is practical. which in turn will result in incorrect product accounting. The subscript m in Equation 9-6 stands for the meter location. To allow comparison of the meter mass indication to the prover volume. it is preferable to locate it between the meter and the prover. A density factor (DF) is obtained. and Cplp = Cplm. it will be necessary to prove the meter’s density measurement. however. If the density is obtained from a density meter or Coriolis meter. (Eq. A significant limitation of using a volumetric prover to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement is that the prover and Coriolis meter measure different quantities. If the fluid temperature and pressure remain constant between the prover and the density measurement device. however. 9-5) ( BPV * C tsp * C psp ) * ρ p MF m = ---------------------------------------------------------M meter where ρm = Fluid density at the density meter Proper determination of the Ctlp and Cplp correction factors requires using the fluid base density (ρb) and the appropriate API table from the Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards. the prover volume must be multiplied by the density of the fluid at operating process conditions — not corrected to standard conditions — to determine the mass of fluid measured by the prover. Equation 9-5 is used for proving the Coriolis meter mass reading against a volumetric prover. These terms will then cancel out. the density measurement could be performed at a location other than the Coriolis meter. 9-6) C tlm * C plm ρ p = ρ m * -------------------------C tlp * C plp For gravimetric tank and Coriolis master meter proving. Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving. The temperature and pressure measurements should be taken as close to the density measurement device as is practical. page 64. For volumetric proving devices. page 27. If the density is not determined right at the prover. then the density measurement must be 122 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . where ρp = Fluid density at the prover Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The primary advantage of using a Coriolis meter for custody transfer measurement is the ability to measure mass directly. (Eq. (Eq. This eliminates the need for making a density measurement to convert volume to mass. It can be installed either at the prover inlet or outlet. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. the prover mass is easily determined. and Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement. The density at the prover (ρp) is equal to the meter’s density reading times the density factor. page 25. as shown in Equation 9-6. or measuring temperature and pressure to convert to a standard volume. Density Measurement Device. and Section 11. 9-4) Prover Mass MF m = ----------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Mass corrected to the conditions at the prover. then: Ctlp = Ctlm.

A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter mass instead of the number of pulses accumulated. or some other component in the proving system. the prover. Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor In many cases the instrumentation required to determine the fluid density at the prover may not be available. Meter Configured for Volume The API recommended equation for calculating repeatability is: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 123 . page 49. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. The general criterion used when proving flowmeters is that the repeatability of the proving results be within 0. A repeatability value that exceeds 0. Typically. The repeatability is used as an indication of whether the proving results are valid. 9. which provides proper accounting of the inventory being measured. 9-8) MFm= MFv * DF where MFm= mass meter factor MFv = volume meter factor DF = density factor For additional details about this proving approach. This value is based on experience with turbine and PD meters proved with conventional pipe provers. page 29. 9-7) C oriolis Meter Pulse M meter = -----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6.3. An alternative is to prove the Coriolis meter’s volume and density measurements and calculate the mass meter factors from the following equation: (Eq. to provide some level of confidence in the proving results. (Eq. a batch totalizing device can be used.Proving Calculations Summary How Many Proving Runs Are Required? 9 The Coriolis meter mass in Equations 9-4 and 9-5 is typically determined from a frequency totalizing device. refer to Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units.05%. 9. The total number of pulses accumulated is divided by the meter’s mass K-factor to determine the mass of fluid measured by the Coriolis meter (Equation 97).4 Repeatability The objective of proving a flowmeter is to obtain a meter factor. For small volume provers 3 or 5 runs of 10 passes each is recommended. This value can then be entered directly into Equations 9-4 and 9-5. at least five proving runs are performed. The number of proving runs required for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8.3 How Many Proving Runs Are Required? The required number of test runs for each proving varies depending on: • Type of proving method being employed • Coriolis meter type and size • Operating flow rate and quantity of fluid accumulated during each proving run Experience with the meter/proving system will ultimately establish the number of runs required. Too much variability could be an indication that there is something wrong with the meter. When performing provings against tank provers.05% often indicates these meters require maintenance.

9-10) MFMAX – MF MIN Repeatability (%) = ----------------------------------------.0005 g/cc will consume the general repeatability specification of 0. both measure volume).9 Proving Calculations Summary Repeatability (Eq. and density) remain stable. it should be fluctuating around an average value. A density variation of 0.* 100 MFMIN where MF = Meter factor If the repeatability calculation were based on the accumulated pulses instead of the meter factor. these variables should not be trending upward or downward. Stability of Process Conditions When proving a flowmeter. as shown in Equation 9-10. (Eq. Variations in temperature will change the thermal expansion of the prover. 9-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN -* Repeatability (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------. If the meter and prover measure in different units (for example. any variations in product density that might occur during proving would not be taken into account. and the maximum and minimum number of accumulated pulses from all of the proving runs are used in Equation 9-9 to determine the repeatability. because the volume or mass may not remain constant from one run to the next. meter measuring mass and prover measuring volume). However. When performing provings in which the meter is configured for mass measurement and the prover is a volumetric device. and pressure variations of 1 to 5 psig around an average value are usually acceptable. the repeatability calculation must be based on the calculated meter factor.5 to 1°F. If the product density varies during a series of proving runs. the proving results will exhibit poor repeatability that is not attributable to the flowmeter. in an actual field application it is often difficult to maintain stable process conditions. The prover must be allowed to stabilize to the process fluid temperature prior to starting the actual proving runs. Meter Configured for Mass Calculating repeatability using Equation 9-9 is only valid if the prover and meter are both measuring in the same units of measure (for example. Products such as light hydrocarbons are unpredictable because they exhibit significant variations in density with 124 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which affects the calculated prover volume.100 Pulses MIN A series of proving runs are conducted. additional precautions are necessary. Equation 9-10 must also be used when performing tank proving and master meter proving.05%. pressure. Specific recommendations for process condition stability are not generally available. it is typically required that the process conditions (temperature. This can lead to calculating a repeatability value greater than could be attributed to the meter. because the effect of varying process temperature and pressure on fluid density depends on the type of fluid being measured. If there is any variation. Temperature variations of 0. A rule of thumb is to monitor the temperature and pressure during the proving runs.

the proving system. A density variation of 0. but it may require using proving runs with a greater quantity of fluid than would be used for a turbine meter. as shown in Equation 9-12.05% repeatability specification can generally be achieved with a Coriolis meter. Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters Although a repeatability of 0. which is a total range of 0. Additional proving runs are recommended to improve confidence in the data. If density cannot be maintained within 0. Therefore. 9-11) Zero Stability Repeatability (%) = 0.0002 g/cc will consume a significant portion of the 0. and the fluid properties should all be checked to verify the entire system is stable and functioning properly. If density cannot be maintained during the proving.* 100 2*(FlowRate) The base repeatability is ±0. This may require increasing the size of a tank prover. (Eq. a Coriolis meter that is functioning properly and is within the manufacturer’s specification would be considered to be unacceptable based on the 0. This is twice the common proving guideline of 0. and determining the sensitivity of the measurement to the individual error sources.” This method of determining uncertainty involves identifying all of the sources of error. then the Coriolis meter. For example.05%. it does not necessarily indicate the same for a Coriolis meter. If the repeatability of a proving is greater than the usual repeatability.Proving Calculations Summary Meter Factor Uncertainty 9 changing temperature and pressure. A Coriolis meter is functioning properly if it is operating within its normal repeatability specification.05%. such as crude oil/water mixtures. For each error source. The 0.05% repeatability specification. The total uncertainty is determined by performing a square root of the sum of the squares calculation on all of the error components. it is recommended that a density sampling method be implemented to provide an average density for each proving run. Other difficult applications involve products with changing composition. A common method used to determine uncertainty is presented in ISO standard 5168.1%. the repeatability limits may need to be increased. pipe prover or small volume prover. The total uncertainty is based on the contributions of the following components: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 125 . 9. the repeatability specification for ELITE sensors is presented in Equation 9-11.05% may be an indication of whether a turbine or PD meter is functioning properly. the uncertainty is multiplied by a calculated sensitivity coefficient.5 Meter Factor Uncertainty The meter factor calculated as a result of the proving can only be as accurate as the proving devices. Alternatively. “Measurement of fluid flow—Estimation of uncertainty of a flow-rate measurement. it may be possible to take a series of proving runs and average the results to provide a larger mass or volume quantity to be used as the basis of the proving calculations.0002 g/cc.05% repeatability specification.05 + -----------------------------------. There will always be some degree of uncertainty associated with the proving results.

steel corrections and/or liquid corrections) The overall uncertainty depends on the random and systematic error components associated with each of these individual error sources. then the meter factor should not be changed. in service where the process fluid conditions remain relatively constant. The reproducibility requirements will be governed by Weights and Measures requirements or contract requirements.6. if used Edensity Ecorr = Uncertainty in fluid density determination at the prover (needed only when comparing meter mass to prover volume) = Uncertainty in the value of any additional correction factors (buoyancy corrections. The proving reproducibility does not depend solely upon the performance of the meter. 9-12) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( Ecounter res ) + ( E density ) + ( E corr ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = Uncertainty in reference used to calibrate the prover Eprover cal = Uncertainty in the calibration of the prover against the reference Eprover res = Uncertainty in the resolution of the prover measurement Ecounter res= Uncertainty due to pulse counting device.25% — that is. If the variation in meter factors from one proving to the next is within the overall uncertainty of the meter factor determination. if needed • Any uncertainty associated with additional correction factors used for determining the meter factor (Eq.9 Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting • The uncertainty inherent in the device used for calibrating the prover • The uncertainty tolerance for agreement of the prover with the calibration device • Any uncertainty inherent in the resolution of the proving device • Any uncertainty associated with counting pulses. the meter factor from the current proving should be within ±0. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are ±0. For many pipeline applications. and fluid properties will also have a significant impact. 126 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 9.6 Reproducibility and Trend Charting Reproducibility is the ability of a meter/prover system to reproduce results over a long period of time. if used • Any uncertainty in the density determination. Understanding the uncertainty associated with the proving method is important for determining the applicability of the meter factor. The reproducibility will ultimately be established from experience with each individual proving system.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. The proving equipment. Uncertainties for each proving method are presented in Section 8. proving method. and will vary somewhat from one proving system to the next. The value that is determined is dependent on the characteristics of the individual proving system. This concept is explained in more detail in Section 9.

which exceed the user-defined limits. 1. includes a trend chart for tracking the Coriolis meter’s meter factors over multiple provings.25% of the centerline. If the meter factor varies from one proving to the next. Acceptable Meter Factor Range Is Determined From First Meter Factor. For many pipeline applications. which is defined to be ±0.003 Meter factor (MF) Acceptable meter factor range ±0. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are 0.996 0. Table 9-1.0005 MF = 1.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. page 128. page 189. From this example it can be seen that the meter factor used for accounting would only be changed when the meter factor determined from proving exceeded the uncertainty limits of the proving. and acceptance limits at +0. Whenever the meter factor is changed. In addition to the acceptance limits. as discussed in the previous section. Trend charting of meter factors will be valuable in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter and determining the required frequency of proving.035% New uncertainty limits set when meter factor is changed 1-Jul 1-Aug 1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr Date of proving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 127 . as illustrated in Figure 9-1. contains hypothetical meter factors for 11 provings.004 1. The only time a new meter factor should be applied is when the value of the meter factor exceeds the uncertainty limits of the proving. held once per month. Figure 9-1. Uncertainties for each proving method are detailed in Section 8. the limits can be set around the average meter factor from a sequence of periodic provings.Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting 9 A change in the meter factor greater than the user-defined limits should be considered suspect. Appendix D.005 1.001 MF = 1. the uncertainty of the proving method should also be included on the trend chart (represented in Figure 9-1 as dashed lines).997 0. When A New Meter Factor Falls Outside The Established Meter Factor Uncertainty Limits.002 1. Meter Factor Trend Chart.001 1 0. The proving uncertainty should be used as the criterion for determining when to change the value being used for the meter factor.035%.25% — that is. the meter factor from the current proving should be within 0.25% and –0. Variations in the meter factor from proving to proving.998 0. which are plotted in Figure 9-1.999 0.995 1-Jun MF = 1.0009 MF = 1. A New Meter Factor Is Determined. The trend chart should be developed with the meter factor of the first proving as the centerline. And New Limits Are Established.25% 1. indicate that it might be necessary to perform provings more often. and every effort should be made to assure that the Coriolis meter and proving system are functioning properly. Alternatively. new uncertainty limits would need to be recalculated to determine when it would be necessary to change the meter factor again. it is not necessarily appropriate to apply a new meter factor to the Coriolis meter’s reading.0013 Uncertainty of proving method ±0.

001 1. 128 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . (Eq.7 Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations In general.0011 1.00085 — — 1.0 or Higher Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. The meter factor value used in this equation is the average meter factor from a number of proving runs. 9. (Eq.00125 — 1. the meter’s inventory will be determined from Equation 9-13.00055 to 1.001 Change MF=1. RFT9739 with Software Version 3. The values in these registers correct the meter’s measurements as shown in Equation 9-14.00165 — — Although this method is technically correct.035%) Determined to be 1.00015 to 1. it does not provide an indication of the reliability of the proving technique.0009 1.00065 to 1.0007 1. volume meter factor (MFv).0014 Action Use MF=1.001 Leave MF=1.0013 1.0009 Change MF=1. and often results in the meter factor being changed unnecessarily.0013 Leave MF=1. 9-13) Coriolis Meter Pulses Measured Quantity = MF * Meter Measurement = MF * ----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Equation 9-13 is the recommended equation for computing inventory for pipeline operations. 9-14) Corrected Measurement = MF * Uncorrected Measurement Three factors are available: mass meter factor (MFm).0015 1. These registers allow the results of a proving to be input directly into the transmitter’s memory.0005 Leave MF=1. Data Are Charted In The Graph Shown In Figure 9-1.0005 Change MF=1.0013 Leave MF=1.0006 1.0 and higher. which eliminates the need for determining the uncertainty of the proving method and developing uncertainty limits.0005 Leave MF=1.0012 1.00135 — — 1.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations Table 9-1. and density factor (DF). Date June1 July 1 Aug 1 Sept 1 Oct 1 Nov 1 Dec 1 Jan 1 Feb 1 Mar 1 Apr 1 Meter factor from proving 1. many users prefer to determine a new meter factor every time the meter is proved. The meter factor that is determined during proving is entered into the appropriate register. Trend Chart Data. without having to modify the factory calibration factors.0009 Leave MF=1. However.0005 1.0013 New uncertainty limits (Uncertainty = ±0.001 Leave MF=1. or use an external device to correct the meter’s measurement.00095 to 1.0007 1.

Alternatively. the meter’s pulse output will be modified. or manually. This was done to prevent the accidental application of multiple factors to the meter’s volume measurement.0000.Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations 9 Because volume is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. the MFv will automatically be reset to a value of 1. or loading-racks at terminals or bulk plants — it is advantageous to adjust the meter reading without having to apply an Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 129 . The problem is. it will also correct the meter’s volume measurement. The disadvantage to this approach is that the inventory measurement during proving will not be corrected by the old meter factor. Then the new meter factor determined during proving would be entered into the meter factor register. which is used to convert the time difference between the sensor pickoff signals to a mass flow rate. a meter factor of 1. If a MFm or DF is entered. The calibration factor resides in the transmitter. if a density factor (DF) is entered. the meter factor in Equation 9-13. Alternatively. the mass meter factor (MFm) that is determined will correct the meter’s volume measurement.0000 would have been applied. Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended For batching applications — such as tank or truck filling. if the meter’s volume is proved. where MFcurrent=Meter factor currently being used MFproving=Meter factor determined from proving RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. as shown in Equation 9-16. Additionally. Therefore. If the meter is then proved. 9-15) MFnew = MF current * MFproving external meter factor. the meter factor determined will actually be a composite of the meter factor from the proving and the current meter factor. the meter measurement can be corrected internally by determining a new flow calibration factor. (Essentially.0. The meter measurement can be corrected by externally applying a meter factor in a flow computer or DCS. using the approach of determining a new K-factor as shown in Equation 9-16 is not recommended for Coriolis meters. and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3. if the meter’s mass flow rate is proved. the volume meter factor (MFv) is only applied to the meter’s volume measurement. For turbine and PD meters this is accomplished by determining a new K-factor for the meter.) This can lead to considerable confusion and should be avoided. is not needed. Values in the meter factor registers adjust all of the meter’s measurements and outputs — digital. The flow calibration factor is a coefficient. Entering a volume meter factor (MFv) will cause the MFm and DF registers to be reset to a value of 1. and the proving results would not be applied to correct the meter inventory. Equation 9-15 should be used. Likewise. In order to determine the new meter factor. the accounting results will only be correct if the K-factor value used in Equation 9-13 is different from the K-factor (or pulse scaling factor) that is resident in the Coriolis meter. pulse and analog. have no meter factor registers.000. 9-16) K–Factor old K–Factor new = -------------------------------MF proving Because the meter factor is already incorporated into the new K-factor. and is set to 1. the analog and digital values will not be affected. (Eq. only the pulse output is affected by this approach. which should be entered in the meter factor register. (Eq. the mass and density measurements will not be corrected.0000. If these two values were the same they would cancel out. However.0000 during proving. the meter factor can be set to 1. it is recommended that a new meter flow calibration factor be determined using Equation 9-17.0 Model RFT9712 transmitters. For applications in which applying an external meter factor is not desired. if a meter factor is being used. However. The scalable frequency output of the Coriolis meter can lead to confusion.

If this method is adopted. page 126).6. 130 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . as described in Section 9. If there are Weights and Measures certifications associated with the meter. security restrictions on the meter would need to be broken to accomplish this. it is important that a trend chart be developed for varying flow calibration factors (instead of meter factors.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations (Eq. 9-17) FlowCalnew = FlowCal current * MFproving where FlowCalcurrent = Flow calibration factor currently configured in the transmitter One of the drawbacks of this approach is that coefficients within the meter are being modified.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poor Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transmitter Outputs and Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting 10. . . . .2 Proving Troubleshooting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Recommendations . . . . . Damping . . . . . . . Calibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 133 133 134 134 135 135 135 135 135 135 136 136 136 136 137 137 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 131 . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Fluid . . . . Piping . . . Flow Tube Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility . . . .1 Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . Zero. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

132 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

to minimize pressure drop. avoid oversizing sensors. Operating in the meter’s upper flow range is recommended to minimize zero influences. because of its explosionproof housing. In addition. • Use ELITE sensors for custody transfer applications. this section provides guidance on troubleshooting when proving problems are encountered. If a D600 is required. causing zero variations to have a larger impact on accuracy. because of the pressure effect on the D300. In some applications. page 195. 10. the sensor should not be installed in pipelines that Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 133 . it should have pressure compensation. which requires an RFT9739 transmitter and an external pressure transducer.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting This section summarizes the recommendations for using and proving Coriolis meters for flow measurement. Zeroing requires stopping flow through the sensor by using appropriate valving. • Requirements for rezeroing the meter will depend on the operating flow rate. there were no ELITE sensors available that could be used as an alternative to the D600 sensor. and the sensor being used. improved temperature stability.1 Summary Recommendations Meter Recommendations • If possible. the temperature variation. automatic pressure compensation should be employed if pressure variations greater than 100 psig will be experienced. • High-pressure Model D sensors should be used only when there are no other standard-pressure sensors available. Sensor Installation • The sensor should be installed to minimize torsional stress being applied to the sensor. For best results a 20:1 turndown from the meter’s maximum full-scale flow rating should not be exceeded. improved density measurement performance. Highpressure sensors have lower sensitivity. a bypass around the meter may be required for the meter zero to be viewed and to permit rezeroing when required.) • Vibration isolation for the sensor is typically not required. • The RFT9739 field-mount transmitter is the preferred transmitter for custody transfer applications. In such applications. The D300 should only be used in applications in which the pressure remains constant. manual or automatic pressure correction must be implemented in the D300 meter flow calibration factor. • A means for zeroing the meter must be provided. • At the time this document was written. and ability to perform pressure compensation. Developing a trend chart of meter zero influence versus temperature will be helpful in establishing rezeroing requirements. • Use an ELITE CMF300 sensor in place of a D300 sensor. (See Appendix E. because of their high accuracy and reduced susceptibility to pressure effect. flow through the system cannot be halted. For custody transfer measurements with ELITE CMF200 and CMF300 sensors. However. In addition.

Generally. flow rate reading. Transmitter Outputs and Configuration • It is recommended that the transmitter’s frequency output be used for both inventory measurement and proving.) 134 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .1 is recommended. A damping factor of 0. a volumetric master meter may be needed as a transfer standard. ELITE sensors have been designed to minimize crosstalk influences. one of the transmitter’s analog outputs should be configured for density indication. a density averaging device. proper density determination at the prover is required. • If the Coriolis meter’s density output will be used in the proving computations. Improper density determination is the major source of problems when proving Coriolis meters with volumetric provers.8 should be suitable for most proving applications.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations vibrate severely. • Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. • The transmitter’s frequency output should be scaled to provide the maximum number of pulses possible to reduce uncertainty due to pulse resolution. output signals and other transmitter information. (See Appendix D. but may be impractical for field applications. • A Coriolis master meter is generally best suited to meter verification for ISO 9000 requirements. • A set of wires (a “pigtail”) from the transmitter’s frequency output should be routed to a an appropriate connector or conduit junction box. Vibration influences between two Coriolis sensors is known as crosstalk. Additionally. in which structural damage to other piping components has occurred. to allow access to the proving signal without opening the transmitter housing.1 is recommended. is recommended. default damping factor of 0. • A set of wires (a “pigtail”) from the transmitter’s primary analog output should be routed to an appropriate connector or a conduit junction box. • When a volumetric proving device is used to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. proving a Coriolis meter with an SVP is challenging. page 189. • For products that exhibit significant density variations (such as LPG. ethylene.8. Proving Recommendations • Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving Coriolis meters. in a safe area. a damping factor of 0. For small volume provers. This will allow access to information on the meter configuration. which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run. • If the prover is too small to obtain adequate repeatability. • The factory-set. ten or more passes per proving run will provide the best results. because prerun times can be quite short. vibration isolation may be required when sensors of the same size and model are mounted close to one another. • Because of the short prerun time when using a small volume prover (SVP). to allow access to HART communication without opening the transmitter housing. density reading. The damping value should never exceed 0. • Multiple pulse counting devices can be connected to the transmitter’s frequency outputs as long as the resulting load is not excessive. liquid CO2). in a safe area. The damping factor should not be modified after the meter has been proved.

the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. • Allow the process fluid to flow through the prover for sufficient time to allow the prover steel temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature. Maintain sufficient pressure at the prover to keep the fluid from flashing. Check the ball for erosion and scoring. the minimum allowable prerun time is 0. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. or any flowmeter. which may randomly trigger the counter. Prover 3.2 Proving Troubleshooting When proving Coriolis meters. A prover prerun of 1 second or Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 135 . A density averager will be required if the density variation exceeds this value. • If flexible hose is used for the prover connections. • For small volume provers that use pressure to launch the piston. but does not drag. Prover • For conventional pipe provers. Piping 2. Recording the meter’s configuration factors every time the meter is proved is a useful tool to aid in troubleshooting meter performance. and the activation is repeatable. • Make sure the prover is appropriately sized. Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. The Prolink software can be used to save this data to an ASCII file on a computer.Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 10. Watch for oscillating control valves. The flow rate should never vary by more than ±10% while proving. make sure the volume of the hose does not change while the meter is being proved. the density should vary by no more than 0. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate is stable during proving. • Crosstalk (vibration influences between Coriolis sensors) may be an issue if multiple Coriolis sensors are installed in the same pipeline. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. Entrained gas affects both the prover repeatability and the meter repeatability.8. • A few passes of the ball or displacer should be made before initiating the proving. For small volume provers.67 seconds. Refer to page 218 for information on vibration effects. greater is desired.0002 g/cc. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. Check for switch bounce. • Allow the process fluid to flow through the meter for sufficient time to allow the flow tube temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature. • Check all block and bleed valves to ensure proper sealing is being accomplished. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate for the prover size. make sure the plenum pressure has been properly set. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. • If the meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved with a volumetric prover. • Make sure the prover detector switches are functioning properly. make sure the prover ball is properly filled to provide a good seal.0000. to ensure proper tempering of the system. Meter configuration should always be checked to make sure it has not changed from one proving to the next.1. Coriolis meter 4. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. Piping • Check for piping leaks. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. Ensure the ball is compatible with the process fluid. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1.

Cavitation creates flow and noise disturbances. which can affect the short term repeatability of the meter. double check to make sure valves are closed and not leaking. which automatically compensates for the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. Prior to any rezeroing. Alternatively. An increase in pressure has a stiffening effect on the sensor flow tubes. Pressure can affect both the mass flow and density measurements. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. For small volume provers. Selecting the proper sensor can minimize or eliminate this influence. Because the density measurement is based on frequency. the meter should be rezeroed. • The sensor flow tubes have been physically changed. Zero The next thing that should be checked is the meter zero. • Difference between the factory calibration lab conditions and the operating process conditions has caused a shift in the Coriolis meter calibration. which can result in an error in the meter factor determination. • The Coriolis meter is not zeroed properly. If the sensor being used is affected by pressure. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. the meter response time may be too slow. the zero drift is insignificant. the meter factor should be 1.8. Changes in sensor mounting conditions. For the effects of pressure on volumetric flow accuracy. in the order in which they should be checked. the next thing that should be checked is the operating pressure. subsequently. there is no effect on the mass flow measurement.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations • Make sure there is no cavitation. this will cause an error in the density measurement and. refer to page 212 in Appendix F.0000. the meter should be operated at a flow rate high enough that 136 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If it is not. and wiring the pressure signal into the RFT9739 transmitter. • Prover calibration is incorrect. This is usually accompanied by poor repeatability. • The meter was previously miscalibrated. For information on the effects of pressure on mass flow accuracy. For the effects of pressure on density accuracy. refer to page 229 in Appendix G. Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility When a meter is proved. an RFT9739 transmitter can be used to automatically compensate for pressure influence. Process Conditions Pressure After the damping factor and meter zero have been checked. The RFT9739 uses a three-point density calibration algorithm. This is accomplished by installing an external pressure transmitter close to the sensor. refer to page 243 in Appendix H.1. If the meter zero has drifted out of specification. page 195. or very close to 1. Increasing the flow rate results in a slight change in the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. the volumetric flow measurement. for more information on meter zeroing. either by erosion or corrosion. or from some type of coating. or changes in the process fluid temperature or density may cause the meter’s “true zero” to change. the source of discrepancy usually lies in one of the following areas: • The Coriolis meter response time and the prover size are mismatched. which is why many commercial density meters limit the maximum fluid flow rate and require a slipstream installation. and the same recommendations apply. The following sections describe how to resolve the discrepancies listed above.0000. Refer to Appendix E. Fluid Flow Rate One other influence is the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. However. If the damping factor is too high. This influence only becomes significant at high fluid velocities (greater than 50% of the sensor’s nominal full-scale flow rate). or the flow calibration factor was inappropriately modified. If the meter will Damping The first thing that should be checked is the meter damping factor. which in turn affects the volumetric flow measurement.

Coatings will generally affect calibration only if the coating material has a different specific gravity than the process fluid. Refer to page 232 for additional details on the influence of fluid flow rate on density accuracy. A solvent cleaning process may be necessary to remove materials that deposit on the flow tubes. a density correction factor should be used. which could lead to tube failure and the release of process fluid. and the meter is used for an abrasive or corrosive fluid. the sensor should be removed and hydrotested to ensure that it will continue to contain the maximum rated pressure. If gradual changes in the meter factor are observed. Flow Tube Changes Gradual changes in the meter factor over time may be the result of flow tube erosion or corrosion. If the fluid is highly abrasive or corrosive. which would affect the mass balance of the sensor flow tubes. a change in the meter factor may indicate that the sensor flow tube wall thickness has been reduced. If the prover has not been calibrated in some time. and the meter factor is correct. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 137 . If all other causes for discrepancies (listed above) have been explored.Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 be used at flow rates higher than 50% of the sensor’s nominal rate. Calibration If the meter calibration is suspect. the meter factor should be checked to make sure it has not been changed from the factory settings. a new waterdraw calibration would be appropriate. the meter can be returned to the factory or sent to an independent flow calibration facility to be rechecked.

138 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. 11. . . . . . Testing the Analog Output . .1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Troubleshooting . . . . . . 156 Density Factor Reproducibility/Trend Charting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Density Proving Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 11-1 Figure 11-2 Figure 11-3 Figure 11-4 Double-walled vacuum-sphere pycnometer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parallel density proving installation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Density Proving Installations . . . . Poor Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Density Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Density Output Signals .2 Recommended Meters for Density Measurement . . . . . . . . 151 Process Requirements . . . . . . . 159 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Density Response Time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Hydrometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 159 160 160 160 148 149 150 157 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 139 . Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Pycnometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Parallel Density Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trimming the Analog Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 142 143 143 143 144 144 145 145 145 145 146 11. . Density Factor Offset . . .0. 158 RFT9739 with Software Version Lower than 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Analog Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Digital Density . 150 Density Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Sample and Laboratory Analysis. . . . 148 Series Density Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Calculating Density Factor . . . 151 Safety Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scaling the Analog Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 or Higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Digital Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Verifying Pycnometer Evacuated Weight . . . . 158 Applying the Density Factor to Correct the Coriolis Meter Measurement 158 RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Digital Density Response Time . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving 11. . . . . Series density proving installation. . . . . . . . . . . .5 Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical density proving report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

140 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

the density factor (DF) is applied as shown in Equation 11-3. 11-3) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MFm = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 141 . (Eq. Another option is to install an additional Coriolis meter at the prover to provide a density measurement.6. This API standard contains a wealth of information on the installation and field verification of density measurement devices. the density of the meter is compared to the density determined from a reference device. (Eq. One alternative to installing a density meter at the prover is to use the density measurement from the Coriolis meter. it is important to prove the density measurement against an established reference.1 Overview Meter proving is typically performed with volumetric provers. page 223.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement—Continuous Density Measurement. 11-1) 1 2 ρ = C a -. The density measurement from a Coriolis meter could be thought of as being obtained from a separate measuring device. If the Coriolis meter’s density measurement will be used to prove its mass flow measurement. The resulting density factor (DF) is determined as shown in Equation 11-2. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the mass flow meter factor that is determined. 11. However. for a detailed discussion on the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. a density measurement must be made at the prover to convert the prover volume to mass. (Eq. When proving the Coriolis meter’s mass flow measurement. The density calibration constants Ca and Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated. Much of the information presented in the following sections was obtained from API MPMS 14. it falls under the requirements of API MPMS 14. 11-2) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------ρ where ρ = Coriolis meter density measurement Refer to Appendix G. A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. the Coriolis meter can be used in any service where a density measurement is needed. The information in this section explains how to obtain and prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Coriolis meters measure density in the same way that other vibrating tube density meters do. To prove the Coriolis meter’s density. as shown in Equation 11-1. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. – C b f Because the Coriolis meter is a vibrating tube density meter. Some users might have concerns about using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove the meter’s mass flow measurement. it should be kept in mind that a Coriolis meter’s density and mass flow measurements are entirely independent of one another. and influences on this measurement. Therefore.

11-5) MFm = MFv * DF If the density factor will be used to correct the meter’s density measurement. one of the key advantages of Coriolis meters is that they are available in a variety of sizes. Some type of sampling system is then required to divert a representative fluid sample into the density meter. it can be assumed that the density at the prover is equal to the density at the Coriolis meter. the Coriolis meter must measure the entire process fluid stream. the density meter will be mounted in a slipstream. ρp. Proving form C-2. can be used to perform this calculation if necessary. Refer to page 229 in Appendix G.0005 g/cc over a range of 0. 11-4) C tlp * Cplp ρ p = ρ m * ------------------------------C tlm * Cplm the Coriolis meter’s volume measurement using standard proving procedures. with a repeatability of ±0. If this is not the case.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement Equation 11-3 uses the density at the prover. The preferred Micro Motion meters for density measurement are the ELITE sensors and the Model D600 sensor.1 to 3. the meter should be pressure compensated using an in-line pressure transmitter. To obtain a flow rate measurement. If the prover and Coriolis meter are located close enough to one another. it can be applied as shown in Equation 11-6. which impacts measurement accuracy at pressures greater than 1000 psig. and the need for sampling systems is eliminated. (Eq. Pressure compensation of the CMF200 sensor is also recommended for applications in which the pressure varies by more than ±200 psig. page 187 (Appendix C). The CMF300 sensor has a very slight pressure effect on density. with the Model RFT9739 transmitter. (Eq. and then prove 11. 1-inch being the most common. Subsequently. for details on pressure compensation.0002 g/cc at any single density. If a 1-inch density meter is being used on a 4-inch pipeline. The density accuracy for the RFT9739 with an ELITE sensor or D600 sensor is ±0. The mass meter factor can then be calculated as shown in Equation 11-5. The advantage of this method is that it employs the standard proving practices and calculations described in API standards. Equation 11-4 can be used to correct the density measured by the Coriolis meter to prover conditions. The D600 density measurement is affected by pressure.2 Recommended Meters for Density Measurement A common limitation of many density meters is they are only available in a limited number of line sizes.0 g/cc. The smaller sized Coriolis meters can be used in a sampling system to provide a density measurement. However. Refer to page 158 for more details on applying the density factor. 11-6) ρ actual = DF * ρ measured An alternative method of determining the mass meter factor is to prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. and the process conditions do not vary significantly between the meter and the prover. the density measurement also represents the entire fluid stream. There are always concerns with sampling system accuracy and being assured that the fluid sample truly represents what is flowing in the pipeline. the same as most other density meters. The RFT9739 transmitter provides better density measurement accuracy than the Model RFT9712. (Eq. If the D600 sensor is used on an application in which the pressure varies by more than ±50 psi. 142 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

see the following Micro Motion instruction manuals: • RFT9739 Transmitter-Specific (HART) Command Specification • Using Modbus Protocol with the Micro Motion ELITE Model RFT9739 Transmitter The handheld Rosemount HART Communicator Model 275 provides communication with the transmitter using the Bell 202 standard. With digital communications the following operations can be performed: • • • • • • Read meter measurements Change meter configuration Perform meter calibration Change output scaling Trim analog outputs Perform output loop tests If a density measurement is needed. Interfacing to Digital Information The transmitter supports two digital communications protocols: HART and Modbus. Baud rates between 1200 baud and 38. PLC.) For more information. In addition. or DCS) that supports the HART or Modbus protocol can be used to acquire the digital information directly from Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 143 . The density measurement can also be obtained by using an appropriate flow computer. the ProLink software program. use terminals 26 (485B) and Digital Density The digital information from the transmitter is the most accurate. see Micro Motion instruction manual Using the HART Communicator with Micro Motion Transmitters. Using ProLink Software with Micro Motion Transmitters. PLC or DCS. If density averaging is needed. additional circuitry in the transmitter is used to convert this digital density information into an analog output. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. cannot be used with later-model RFT9739 transmitters. it can be read using a HART Communicator or the ProLink software program. the SMART FAMILY Interface Model 268.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 11. The program requires a personal computer with an Intel® 386 or higher-version microprocessor. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 24 AWG (0. The calculated density can be accessed through digital communication with the transmitter. For more information. the transmitter. The digital information from the transmitter can be obtained in a number of ways: • Using the RS-485 output and HART protocol • Using the RS-485 output and Modbus protocol • Using the Bell 202 standard and HART protocol Any external computing/monitoring device (flow computer. which will convert either Bell 202 or RS-485 communications to RS-232. and must not exceed 4000 feet (1220 meters) in length. This handheld device is particularly convenient for field configuration and monitoring of the meter. and operates in the Microsoft® Windows® graphical environment. Using the RS-485 Output The RS-485 output signal is a ±5V square wave referenced to the transmitter ground. the digital density output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average the digital information. Micro Motion also has available a PC-based communications package. The ProLink program has additional features for performing meter diagnostics and logging data to ASCII data files for further analysis. (The older Rosemount communicator.4 kilobaud can be selected.3 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Density Output Signals The Coriolis meter density measurement is calculated by the transmitter microprocessor. For more information.

2 kHz. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. independent of the frequency of vibration of the meter. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. • Under HART protocol. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.1 seconds. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0. However. Analog Density The transmitter analog output is typically used for process control.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 27 (485A).1 mm2 wire). The value of the “internal damping” can be varied from 0 to 8192 seconds. the response time of the digital density made available to digital outputs. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). or a display.2 or 2. The baud rate is limited to 1200 baud. Digital Density Response Time Using an RFT9739. There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. requirements vary as follows. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22 (485A). depends on any additional “internal damping” that is applied. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Depending on the selected protocol. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). Therefore.5 seconds. • Under Modbus protocol. The RFT9739 implements a selective digital software filter on the density output. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks — Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. Bell 202. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level. Therefore. 15 meters for 0.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. RS-485 Multidrop Networks — Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. the “internal damping” value for density should not exceed 0. with an amplitude of 0. A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. the primary variable (PV) analog output can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA.8V peak-to peak. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. For proving applications. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. If polling addresses are used.3 mm2 wire. such as the RS-485. A limitation of analog outputs is that they must be properly scaled and trimmed to provide an accurate measurement. The damping value is a filter coefficient. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the density. Consult 144 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. the basic density measurement is updated by the microprocessor every 0.

In this case. the density scaling can be set to 0.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 the HART Communicator or ProLink manual when carrying out these operations. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA. the density-tocurrent relationship is determined as shown in Equation 11-7. and 1. DCS).0625 X ( mA ) + 0. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. If means are not available to obtain the digital density. For proving applications.9 g/cc = 20 mA. The RFT9739 provides functions for trimming the analog output with a HART Communicator or the Prolink Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 145 . one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device.5 to 8192 seconds. with a 1000 ohm load limit. A typical configuration would be to set a density of 0. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible.7 to 0.7 20 – 4 ρ(g/cc) = 0. page 144).65 Analog Density Response Time In addition to “internal damping” (see Digital Density Response Time. For example. If density averaging is needed. the density-to-current relationship would be: X–4 ρ – 0.9 – 0. 11-7) X – X min ρ – ρ min ---------------------------------.0125 X (mA) + 0.= --------------0. The PV analog output is disabled if the RFT9739 is configured for HART communication over the Bell 202 standard and the RFT9739 has been assigned an address other than 0 for multidrop communication.7 g/cc = 4 mA. The value of the “secondary damping” can be varied from 0. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). Using these values. the density can only be obtained from the SV analog output. the scaling range of the analog output can be reduced.9 g/cc. so an external DC power supply is not required.= -----------------------------------X max – X min ρ max – ρ min Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered.25 If the resolution of the measurement needs to be improved. The most typical configuration is 4-20 mA. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. if it is known that the fluid density will always fall in the range of 0. Based on these settings. Trimming the Analog Output Trimming of the analog output is required to ensure the analog output from the RFT9739 matches the reading of the input device used to provide the density indication (flow computer. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. there is a secondary digital filter.0 g/cc = 4 mA. It is recommended that no additional damping be applied to the analog density output. The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA. and 0. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. The added damping value is the time coefficient of the secondary filter. which can be used to apply additional damping to the analog output density measurement. where = ρ ρmin = ρmax = = X Xmin = density measurement (in g/cc) 0 (density span minimum value) 1 (density span maximum value) analog output (in milliamperes) 4 (analog output span minimum value) Xmax= 20 (analog output span maximum value) Solving for ρ: ρ (g/cc) = 0. this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal. (Eq.7 --------------------. PLC. Scaling the Analog Output The analog outputs can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs.0 g/cc = 20 mA.

the trimming operation would follow these steps: 1. then steps 2 through 5 are repeated. to obtain the true density. the current output can be set to any value between 2 and 22 mA. Output from the RFT9739 is set to 4 mA. steps 1 through 4 are repeated until an acceptable reading is obtained. 11. The density meter in this case is the Coriolis meter. Then the hydrometer is floated in the container. the current output can be set to any value between 0 and 22 mA. Fluid density is determined by reading the point at which the surface of the liquid cuts across the scale of the hydrometer. If the mA current reading at the input device is 4 mA. Therefore.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement program. The hydrometer only reads correctly at its reference temperature (usually 60°F). and the properties of the process fluid being measured. 5. Therefore. The mA current that was viewed is entered into the RFT9739 as the measured output. The choice of reference device for determining “true” density depends on the required accuracy of the density determination. as shown in Equation 11-8. The density factor is determined by dividing the density measurement of a reference device by the Coriolis meter’s density reading.4 Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density proving parallels flow proving. The upward buoyant force exerted on the hydrometer depends on the density of the fluid. 3. a temperature measurement is also required to correct the hydrometer reading to the actual fluid temperature. The mA current being measured by the input device is viewed. The purpose of density proving is to determine a density factor. which should be pulled from the 146 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . This degree of resolution is not as good as the density resolution of the Coriolis meter. 11-8) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density process pipeline at a point as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. is collected in a cylindrical container. A thermohydrometer incorporates a temperature measurement directly into the hydrometer. Devices commonly available for performing the reference density determination are described below. because the volume of the liquid being measured will change with changes in temperature. 6. Hydrometers generally have a density measurement resolution of ±0. (Eq. 2. which is used to correct the density reading from the density meter. some accuracy may be sacrificed when proving using a hydrometer as the reference device. This is particularly useful for making sure the density indication device is performing the milliamp-to-density calculation properly. Hydrometer A hydrometer is essentially a graduated cylinder with a weight in the bottom. If the analog output has been configured for 4-20 mA.001 g/cc. The RFT9739 is then instructed to perform a calibration. A fluid sample. If the analog output has been configured for 0-20 mA. output from the RFT9739 is set to 20 mA. It is important to remember that a density measurement under actual process conditions is needed — not a reference density measurement. Using one of these devices. Testing the Analog Output In addition to trimming. The density factor is then multiplied by the Coriolis meter density reading. If the mA current reading at the input device is not 4 mA. using a current reading of 20 mA in step 5. the RFT9739 transmitter provides the capability of testing the analog output for performing troubleshooting operations. 4.

Sample and Laboratory Analysis This method requires a fluid sample to be drawn off the process pipeline into a suitable sampling container. Again. The density measurement accuracy for pycnometers is ±0. fluid properties must be considered. at atmospheric conditions they become gas. ( Sample Density ) REF DF = -------------------------------------------------------------ρ REF Pycnometer A pycnometer is essentially a pressurecontaining sphere with a known internal volume and evacuated mass (see Figure 11-1). If components of the fluid vaporize on exposure to the atmosphere. or by mass and volume measurements. The sample point should be located as close as possible to the Coriolis meter. and the internal volume of the pycnometer (density = mass/volume). which introduce a degree of uncertainty into the density factor determination. off of the main pipeline. The limitation of this approach is that the laboratory density determination typically is not at the same process conditions as those that existed in the pipeline.0001 g/cc. where Sample DensityREF = density of sample at reference conditions = density reading ρREF from Coriolis meter corrected to reference conditions Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 147 . then the pycnometer is removed from the pipeline and weighed.0001 g/cc can be achieved using the sample and laboratory analysis method. the density measured by the meter must be corrected to reference conditions using correction factors. The pycnometer valves are closed. For fluids such as these. The fluid density is determined from the mass of the fluid.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement 11 The type of fluid being measured by the hydrometer must also be considered. The sampling line should be located as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. and the density of the product is determined by a reference density meter. This method may not be suitable for a process fluid with components that will vaporize at atmospheric pressure. Simultaneously the density from the Coriolis meter is recorded along with the temperature and pressure at the meter. The density of such products is greatly affected by changes in process temperature and pressure. LPG. These products must be kept under pressure to remain in a liquid state. Fluid under actual flowing conditions is diverted into the pycnometer. the density measurement by the hydrometer will not reflect the actual density of the fluid in the pipeline. A pycnometer is used primarily for density proving when measuring light-end hydrocarbons such as ethylene. because the meter factor cannot be calculated until the density factor has been determined. Density measurement accuracies of ±0. liquid CO2. A pressure hydrometer works like a hydrometer. and ρm ρ REF = ------------------------------C tlm * C plm where ρm = Coriolis meter density reading at actual flowing conditions Ctlm = fluid temperature correction Cplm = fluid pressure correction Using a laboratory for density determination will generally delay the proving process. except the cylindrical container used to collect the fluid sample can be sealed. The following equations are used to determine the Coriolis meter’s density factor. The sample is then taken to a lab. and natural gas liquids. The hydrometer is only suitable if the fluid vapor pressure is below the atmospheric pressure. and can withstand the application of internal pressure. The pycnometer is installed in a density sampling line. ethane mixtures. a pressure hydrometer should be considered. Therefore.

11

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

**Figure 11-1. Double-walled vacuum-sphere pycnometer.
**

Welded

Flow Gas vent hole

Flow Siphon tube Welded

Rupture disk

For products that remain liquid at atmospheric conditions, a pycnometer is not generally required for sampling. If the density of crude oil is being measured, for example, a pycnometer would probably not be a good choice because residue from the crude may deposit in the pycnometer, affecting the calibrated volume of the pycnometer. In this case, some type of sampling approach, which was discussed in the previous section, would be more appropriate. The rest of this section on proving the Coriolis meter’s density measurement is based primarily on the information presented in API MPMS 14.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement - Continuous Density Measurement. API MPMS 14.6 is targeted primarily at proving the density using a pycnometer. However, many of the principles described can be applied to the other methods for determining the reference density.

In order for a density proving to be valid, the temperature and pressure at the meter and the pycnometer must agree to within 0.2°F and 1 psig. Correction factors, to compensate for temperature and pressure differences between the pycnometer and the Coriolis meter, are not applied. Therefore, the pycnometer should be as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. Piping between the meter and the pycnometer should be minimized in an effort to achieve the same process conditions inside the pycnometer and the meter. All of the piping between the pycnometer, Coriolis meter, and the pressure and temperature measurements must be insulated. Insulating the Coriolis meter is desirable to minimize the influence of ambient temperature on the process fluid density. A vacuum jacketed pycnometer, which acts like a thermos bottle, is recommended. If a single sphere pycnometer is used, it must have an insulating jacket surrounding it when a sample is being taken. Because the goal is to ensure that the density in the pycnometer is the same as the density in the Coriolis meter, there must be a means available for diverting a representative fluid sample out of the pipeline into the pycnometer. The fluid will follow the path of least resistance, which is the main pipeline.

**Density Proving Installations
**

When performing density proving, it is important to keep in mind what is trying to be achieved. The purpose is to make sure that the density of the fluid in the prover (in this case, a pycnometer) is the same as the density of the fluid in the Coriolis meter.

148

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

11

Fluid flowing in a 4-inch pipeline will not flow into a ¾-inch pipeline branch without some type of inducement. Typically used are an orifice plate or throttling valve to generate sufficient restriction in the main pipeline to divert fluid into the density sampling loop. A throttling valve is the best choice, because the amount of pressure drop through the meter can be adjusted. Also, after the density proving has been accomplished, the valve can be fully opened, which will minimize additional pressure drop during normal operation. In conjunction with the flow restricting device in the main pipeline, an inexpensive flow indicator in the sampling loop is recommended to ensure there is sufficient fluid flow in the pipeline branch. There are two installations available for density proving: series and parallel. Each of these installations has advantages and disadvantages, which are detailed in the following sections.

**Series Density Installation
**

A series installation is illustrated in Figure 11-2. This is the most common installation used to prove density meters. Advantages and disadvantages of this installation are described below. Advantage No product is diverted around the Coriolis meter. Therefore, there is no impact on product accounting. Disadvantage Because the pycnometer is located downstream of the meter, there is a greater tendency for the density of the product in the pycnometer to be different than in the meter. This is a particular problem with applications where the process fluid density is greatly affected by the pressure, and the flow rate is high, creating a significant pressure drop across the Coriolis meter. It is also a problem

**Figure 11-2. Series density proving installation.
**

Vent line

VOut

T

P

FI

Density sampling loop

V2

Pycnometer (vacuum-type, or insulated)

VIn

Insulation

V1

Flow

V3

T

Sensor

P

V4

Insulation of sensor recommended

Transmitter Key to symbols P = Pressure T = Temperature FI = Flow indicator Coriolis meter

Density display

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

149

11

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

if the product composition varies dramatically with time. Any time lag between the meter and the pycnometer can result in measurement problems. Furthermore, this installation does not take advantage of the pressure drop through the Coriolis meter to assist in diverting fluid into the pycnometer sampling loop.

the Coriolis meter, it is more likely that the fluid properties inside the pycnometer will be the same as in the Coriolis meter. The time lag between the meter and the pycnometer is eliminated. Disadvantage A small amount of product is diverted around the Coriolis meter into the density sampling loop. This product will not be accounted for in the inventory measurement, which violates one of the design criteria of API 14.6. A flow indicator in the density sampling line can be used to account for this loss through hand calculations, but this may be inconvenient. Because the amount of fluid unaccounted for should be relatively small, it may be determined that this loss is insignificant in relation to some of the sampling advantages.

**Parallel Density Installation
**

A parallel installation is illustrated in Figure 11-3. Advantage and disadvantages of this installation are described below. Advantages The pressure drop through the Coriolis meter assists in diverting the process fluid through the pycnometer sampling loop. Additionally, because the pycnometer is located parallel to

**Figure 11-3. Parallel density proving installation.
**

Vent line

VOut

T

P

FI

Density sampling loop

V2

VIn Pycnometer (vacuum-type, or insulated)

Insulation

V3 T P

Insulation

V1

Sensor

Flow Insulation of sensor recommended

V4

Transmitter

Coriolis meter

Density display

Key to symbols P = Pressure T = Temperature FI = Flow indicator

150

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

11

**Density Proving Equipment
**

The equipment required for both series and parallel density installations are the same, although some of the components are in different locations. Refer to Figure 11-2, page 149, and Figure 11-3, page 150, when reviewing equipment requirements. The key components are temperature and pressure measurements at both the pycnometer and meter, and some means for ensuring flow is being diverted into the pycnometer.

Coriolis Meter The meter provides the density measurement that is being proved. Density Display The Coriolis meter density must be read during the proving. The density can be obtained using a HART Communicator, the ProLink program, the RFT9739 display, or a flow computer, PLC or DCS. Temperature at the Meter (Tm) The temperature instrument must be accurate to 0.2°F and traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The temperature measurement is used for verifying agreement with the pycnometer to ensure the process conditions are the same at both the pycnometer and the Coriolis meter. Generally, a thermowell and precision thermometer are used. Electronic temperature devices are also used instead of a thermometer, and have the advantage of having a display, which improves readability. To eliminate temperature measurement errors between different devices, a single temperature measurement instrument is typically used. The temperature instrument is moved back and forth between the thermowells at the meter and the pycnometer, to verify temperature agreement. After temperature stability has been established, the temperature reading at the meter is recorded. Pressure at the Meter (Pm) The pressure instrument must be accurate to 1 psi, and be traceable to NIST. The pressure measurement is used for verifying agreement with the pycnometer to ensure the process conditions are the same at both the pycnometer and the Coriolis meter. High-accuracy pressure gauges are most commonly used. However, electronic pressure devices are available, and have the advantage of improved repeatability.

Safety Requirements

Safety should be kept in mind when selecting and designing equipment for the density sampling loop. When dealing with liquefied gases, the operating pressures can be very high. The following safety precautions should be taken: • The pycnometer and associated tubing must be designed to operate well above the maximum working pressure of the system. The pycnometer certificate should be checked to verify the maximum operating pressure. • Stainless steel components must accommodate the low temperatures that can occur when a high-pressure liquefied gas expands on release to the atmosphere. • All materials should be resistant to corrosive attack by the fluids with which they come in contact. • After filling, the pycnometer should be weighed as soon as possible, to minimize any rise in pressure due to increasing temperature. The pycnometer should be equipped with a suitable safety rupture disc. • As soon as possible after weighing, the pycnometer should be emptied in a safe location. Adequate facilities should be provided for venting and draining the pycnometer.

Process Requirements

A list of the required process components, and particular details of each component, are discussed below:

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

151

11

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

Pycnometer The pycnometer with valves Vin and Vout is a pressure vessel, generally made of stainless steel. The pycnometer is designed to vent entrained bubbles and, therefore, must be installed in the sampling loop per the manufacturer’s instructions. Its volume and evacuated tare weight at standard conditions of pressure and temperature are determined at the time of manufacture. The volume is generally 1000 cubic centimeters. The pycnometer weight will have to be adjusted for any additional fittings that provide connection to the density sampling line. Pycnometers are available with either a single wall or a double wall with a vacuum pulled between the walls. Double-wall pycnometers are preferred because they act like a thermos bottle, eliminating the need for a separate insulation jacket and improving temperature and pressure stabilization. The double wall eliminates the formation of condensation on the pycnometer, which would otherwise have to be removed prior to weighing. The double wall also protects the certified volume from dents, which would change the calibrated volume. Most important, the vacuum insulation minimizes increases in temperature, in turn minimizing pressure increases inside the pycnometer, which may occur when the pycnometer is removed from the sampling loop. It should be kept in mind that a liquefied gas inside a steel vessel can behave like a bomb. Extreme caution should be exercised when handling the pycnometer. An appropriately sized rupture disc is required. Temperature at the Pycnometer (Tp) The temperature instrument must be accurate to 0.2°F and be traceable to NIST. The temperature measurement is used primarily to correct the pycnometer volume for the effect of thermal expansion on the steel vessel. It is also used to verify temperature agreement with the Coriolis meter. Generally, a thermowell and precision thermometer are used. Electronic temperature devices are also used instead of a thermometer, and have the advantage of

having a display, which improves readability. To eliminate temperature measurement errors between different devices, a single temperature measurement instrument is typically used. The temperature instrument is moved back and forth between the thermowells at the meter and the pycnometer, to verify temperature agreement. After temperature stability has been established, the temperature reading at the pycnometer is recorded. Pressure at the Pycnometer (Pp) The pressure instrument must be accurate to 1 psi, and be traceable to NIST. This pressure measurement is used primarily to correct the pycnometer for the effect of pressure on the volume of the steel vessel. It is also used to verify pressure agreement with the Coriolis meter. High-accuracy pressure gauges are most commonly used. However, electronic pressure devices are available, and have the advantage of improved repeatability. Flow Indication at Pycnometer (FIp) An inexpensive flowmeter, such as a rotameter or low-accuracy turbine meter, is often used to verify that there is sufficient fluid velocity in the density sampling line. This is done to ensure that the fluid flowing into the pycnometer is representative of the fluid flowing through the Coriolis meter. This flow indication is optional. Sampling Loop Inlet Valve (V1) Valve V1 is used to allow flow into the density sampling loop. This valve should provide as little pressure drop as possible in the open position, and must be capable of positive shutoff of flow. A valve with quick closing action is preferred. Stainless steel quarterturn ball valves with appropriate seating material are commonly used. The distance between the sampling loop inlet valve and the pycnometer should be minimized, which will minimize the amount of vapor that is released when the pycnometer is removed from the sampling line. Alternately, a vent line can be installed between V1 and Vin.

152

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

are typically added to the pycnometer. the prover block valves can be used to throttle the flow. Valve V2 is also used to vent the process fluid from the density sampling line prior to removing the pycnometer. back into the main pipeline. but must also be located downstream of the Coriolis meter. the scale must be checked for accuracy using class S or P certified test weights. which provide a suitable quick connect/disconnect. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 153 . Weigh Scale An electronic scale is used to weigh the pycnometer. Insulation The API Standard requires that the temperature and pressure differences between the density meter and pycnometer not exceed 0. and is oriented vertically. the tubing should be equipped with suitable fittings that will allow the pycnometer to be removed from the sampling line. allows the pressure drop through the prover to assist in forcing fluid through the sampling loop. whichever is less. stable. The tubing size is commonly 3/8 to 5/8 inch. they usually work in a suitable fashion. such as a globe valve. The size of this tubing will generally depend on what size valves are used on the pycnometer. Stainless steel quarterturn ball valves with appropriate seating material are commonly used. and must be capable of positive shutoff of flow. The vent pipe is generally 1 to 2 feet tall. but can be connected to a flare line. preventing it from entering the main pipeline. it is critical that the Coriolis meter and pycnometer be installed as close together as possible. is preferred. vibration-free surface. Locating the density sampling return line downstream of proving connections. For a parallel density sampling installation. the vent line should be full of liquid prior to diverting flow back to the main pipeline. In lieu of a separate flow throttling valve. The vent valve should also provide as little pressure drop as possible in the open position. In addition. and pressure and temperature instruments must be fully insulated. and fittings between the Coriolis meter. When filling the pycnometer. Although block valves do not provide a great deal of flow control. The scale must have sufficient resolution to provide a measurement accuracy of ±0. At the pycnometer.02% of the test fluid weight or the air-filled pycnometer weight. A valve with quick closing action is preferred. to minimize pressure drop in the sampling loop. Before each use. Additional fittings. It is most commonly open to the atmosphere. valve V4 would be located between the inlet and outlet lines to the density sampling loop. A circular cork ring placed on the weighing pan of the scale is recommended to center and stabilize the pycnometer while it is being weighed. Stainless steel quarter-turn ball valves with appropriate seating material are commonly used. respectively.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement 11 Sampling Loop Return Valve (V3) Valve V3 is used to allow flow out of the density sampling loop. A valve with quick closing action is preferred. Density Sampling Tubing The tubing that is used for the density sampling loop should be made of stainless steel. The scale must be placed in a draft free environment and on a level. and 1 psi. For this reason. piping. The largest practical tubing size should be used.2°F. All tubing. Flow Throttling Valve (V4) Valve V4 is used to create sufficient pressure drop in the main pipeline to divert adequate flow through the pycnometer. A valve that has the capability of throttling flow. components that are already present in the system may be suitable for generating sufficient pressure drop. This valve should provide as little pressure drop as possible in the open position. For a series density sampling installation. Sampling Loop Vent Valve (V2) and Vent Pipe Valve V2 is used to vent air and vapor from the pycnometer and density sampling loop. and must be capable of positive shutoff of flow. valve V4 is also located between the inlet and outlet to the density sampling loop. pycnometer.

personnel should be informed of escape routes and the location of the nearest fire extinguishers. b. open the return valve V3. (It is suggested that three or four readings be made. 7. b. there will be small changes in the last digits of the density reading. Pm. Valves V1. e.05%. 10 to 15 seconds apart. d. page 149. safety should be the top priority for the operating personnel of the density proving system. There should be plans for worst case events. and V3 should all be closed.When the pycnometer and sampling loop are full of fluid. (Alternately. First close Vout. Check for agreement of temperature (to 0. Immediately close the pycnometer valves. Calculate the density factor (DF) for the two runs (as shown in the following section). the density update is fairly rapid. 4.2°F) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. ρ. Close the vent valve V2.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density Proving Procedure Again. Pp.Break the pipe fitting between Vout and V3. Break the pipe fitting between V1 and Vin. V2. Tm. Record density data: a. c. The inlet and outlet valves to the pycnometer Vin and Vout should be open.Pycnometer temperature. Coriolis meter temperature. Any leakage from the pycnometer will void the test and require steps 4 through 9 to be repeated. If a flow indication (FIp) is being used.Pycnometer pressure. Coriolis meter density reading. e. Open sampling loop inlet valve V1.) 8. 6. an additional vent valve and line can be installed between valves V1 and Vin. b. Remove the pycnometer from the sample loop and check for leakage. c. Empty the pycnometer of its contents in a safe location. Verify that pressure and temperature measurement devices are operating suitably. Close density sampling inlet and outlet valves V1 and V3. Personnel must have a complete understanding of the fluid properties and associated hazards. Allow the system to achieve steady state conditions: a. Record the weight (Wf). 14. a small amount of gas will be released. Adjust the throttle valve V4 to divert fluid into the sampling loop. Coriolis meter pressure.Open sampling loop vent valve V2. If they do not. Verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight (see page 155 for the procedure). c. The density factors for the two runs are averaged to obtain the final density factor for the Coriolis meter (DFavg). Install the pycnometer in the density sampling loop as shown in either Figure 11-2. 13.) d. 5. 10. b. to ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer valves. Verify the scale calibration against certified test weights. 9.02%. 2. 1. d. 3.) 11. 12. (With a 0. Close V2.Open vent valve V2 to discharge any vapor from the sampling line. Tp. Perform the following operations to disconnect and remove the pycnometer: a. then close Vin.Check for agreement of pressure (to 1 psig) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer.05%. The density factor for the two runs must agree to within 0.5 damping value. Weigh the pycnometer immediately. ensure sufficient flow is being diverted into the sampling loop. e. or Figure 11-3. page 150. Repeat steps 4 through 11 for a second run. 154 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . It may necessary to record two or three readings and average them. The measured evacuated weight must agree with the pycnometer’s certificate weight to within ±0. The density proving procedure is detailed below. Fill the pycnometer using the following valve opening sequence: a. repeat steps 4 through 13 until two consecutive runs agree to within 0. c.

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

11

15. Next, the pycnometer should be cleaned: a. Wash the inside of the pycnometer, first with solvent, then with acetone. b.Purge the inside of the pycnometer with clean dry air or nitrogen, to dry the acetone. c. Wash the outside of the pycnometer with distilled water, rinse with acetone, and blow dry the outside of the pycnometer. d.Return the pycnometer to its storage case.

• • • • •

The pycnometer’s air filled weight (Wa) The pycnometer pressure (Pp) The pycnometer temperature (Tp) The pycnometer’s fluid filled weight (Wf) The Coriolis meter density reading (ρm)

**Verifying Pycnometer Evacuated Weight
**

Prior to proving, the pycnometer’s evacuated weight must be compared to the value from the pycnometer certificate to ensure the mass has not changed as a result of corrosion or coating. A sample proving report is shown in Figure 11-4, page 157. Lines 1 through 7 present a verification of pycnometer evacuated weight, including calculations. These calculations can be performed on the blank calculation form C-1, page 186 (Appendix C). 1. Place the pycnometer on the scale. Record the air filled weight (Wa). 2. Calculate the air density (ρA) using Equation 11-9. (Eq. 11-9)

ρ A = 0.012 * ( 1 – 0.0032h )

**Density Proving Calculations
**

The density proving calculation on form C-1, page 186 (Appendix C), is used to verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight, and to determine the density factor. Prior to beginning the calculations the following data must be available. The following values are obtained from the pycnometer’s calibration certificate. (The pycnometer should be certified by an independent laboratory at least every two years, and a new calibration certificate issued.) • Pycnometer evacuated weight (Wo). If the fluid-filled pycnometer is weighed with additional fittings, the weight of the fittings should be added to Wo. • Pycnometer base volume (PBV) • Coefficient of expansion due to temperature (Et) • Reference temperature (Td), used in determining the PBV • Coefficient of expansion due to pressure (Ep) The following values are also needed: • The density of the test weights (ρTW) • The elevation of the test site above sea level (h). The following measurements, which are obtained while carrying out the Coriolis meter density proving procedure, are required:

The air density is determined from the altitude, so for a given location it will be a constant and only needs to be calculated once. 3. Verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight (Wo), by taking the actual weight of the pycnometer filled with air (Wa) and subtracting the calculated weight of the air contained inside the pycnometer. Use Equation 11-10. (The symbols used in Equation 11-10 are defined in the previous section.) (Eq. 11-10)

Field W o = Field W a – ρ A * PBV

4. Compare the Field Wo with the pycnometer certificate Wo. If the difference exceeds 0.02%, the pycnometer should not be used.

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

155

11

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

**Calculating Density Factor
**

Refer to Figure 11-4, page 157, for an example of a typical density proving report. The blank density proving form C-1, page 186 (Appendix C),can be copied and used for recording data. (The symbols used in the following equations are defined two sections back.) 1. Calculate the pressure correction on the pycnometer volume (PC), using the pycnometer pressure (in psig) and Equation 11-11. (Eq. 11-11)

PC = E p * Pp

(Eq. 11-15)

M f = ( W f – W o ) * CBW

6. Determine the fluid density at actual flowing conditions (ρf) by dividing the fluid mass by the corrected pycnometer volume, as shown in Equation 11-16. (Eq. 11-16)

Mf ρ f = -----------PV tp

2. Calculate the temperature correction on the pycnometer volume (TC), using the pycnometer temperature and Equation 1112. (Eq. 11-12)

TC = 1 + E t ( Tp – T d )

7. Determine the density factor (DF) by dividing ρf by the Coriolis meter density reading (ρm), as shown in Equation 11-17. The pycnometer density and the Coriolis meter density must be in the same measurement units. Refer to Table C-1, page 187, for a list of conversion factors. (Eq. 11-17)

ρf DF = ------ρm

**3. Calculate the pycnometer’s flowing volume (PVtp) using Equation 11-13. (Eq. 11-13)
**

PV tp = ( PBV + PC ) * TC

8. Determine the results of the second proving run. Repeat calculation steps 1 through 7 for the second run. (A third proving can be performed, but is not required.) 9. Determine the repeatability of the two (or three) runs using Equation 11-18. (Eq. 11-18)

DF max – DFmin Repeatability (%) = -------------------------------------------- * 100 DFmin

4. Calculate the local air buoyancy factor for the test weights (CBW) using Equation 1114. (Eq. 11-14)

ρA C BW = 1 – ---------- ρ TW

For a successful test, the DF values for the successive proving runs must not differ by more than 0.05%. 10. Calculate the new density factor (DF) using Equation 11-19. (If a third proving run were performed it would be included in the average also.) (Eq. 11-19)

DF run1 + DFrun2 DFavg = -----------------------------------------------2

A constant value for CBW may be used for a specific site and set of test weights. 5. Determine the mass of the fluid (Mf) using Equation 11-15.

156

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

11

**Figure 11-4. Typical density proving report.
**

Location: Product: CORIOLIS METER DATA Manufacturer: Micro Model: CMF200 Density of Test Weights, ρTW : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Date: Meter Tag No.: PYCNOMETER DATA Report No.:

Motion

Serial No.: 123456 Current DF : 1.0000

PBV (cm ): 1001.40

3

Serial No.: 987654

Wo (g):

1916.94

**Ep : 0.0013802 Et : 0.0000265
**

cm3 g ft

7.84

(7.84 g/cc for SS)

Ref. Temp., Td (°F): 0

VERIFICATION OF PYCNOMETER EVALUATED WEIGHT Pycnometer base volume, PBV Pycnometer evaluated weight, Wo Elevation, h Air density, ρA Pycnometer air-filled weight, Wa Field-evacuated weight, Field Wo Difference between field and certificate (≤0.02%) = Line 5 – (Line 4 * Line 1) = (Line 2 – Line 6) * 100 / Line 2 DENSITY METER PROVING Flowing Conditions 8 9 10 11 12 13 Observed Coriolis meter density, (ρm ) Coriolis meter temperature, (Tm ) Coriolis meter pressure, (Pm ) Pycnometer temperature, (Tp ) Pycnometer pressure, (Pp ) Ambient temperature g/cc °F psig °F psig °F = 0.0012 * [1 – (0.000032 * Line 3)] (from certificate) (from certificate)

g/cc g g %

1001.40 1916.94 2900 0.001089 1918.23 1917.14 0.01

0.54153 98.5 608 98.5 608 89 0.83916 1.00261 1004.855 2461.19 0.99986 544.174 0.54155 1.000037

0.53674 95.3 607 95.2 607 90 0.83778 1.00252 1004.766 2456.43 0.99986 539.414 0.53686 1.00022 0.019 1.00013 1.00013

Corrected Pycnometer Volume 14 15 16 Pressure correction, (PC ) Temperature correction, (TC ) Corrected volume, (PVtp ) Fluid filled weight, (Wf ) Buoyancy correction, (CBW ) Fluid mass, (Mf ) Fluid density, (ρf ) Density factor, (DF) = 1 – (Line 4 / ρTW ) = (Line 17 – Line 2) * Line 18 = Line 19 / Line 16 = Line 20 / Line 8 = (DFmax – DFmin ) * 100 / DFmin = (DFrun1 + DFrun2 ) / 2 = DFcurrent * Line 23 % g = Ep * Line 12 = 1 + Et * (Line11 – Td ) = (Line 1 + Line 14) * Line 15 cm3 cm3

Fluid Weight 17 18 19 g

Fluid Density 20 21 22 23 g/cc

DF repeatability

Average density factor

RFT9739 Version 3 Transmitters 24 New density factory

Comments

WITNESS Signature Company Date

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

157

11

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement

**Density Factor Reproducibility/Trend Charting
**

Reproducibility is the ability of the meter and proving system to reproduce results over a long period of time. Reproducibility requirements for density measurement are not as well defined as for flow measurement, but will generally be governed by contract requirements or meter accuracy specifications. The proving reproducibility does not depend solely upon the performance of the meter. A change in the density factor greater than the user-defined limits should be considered suspect, and every effort should be made to assure that the Coriolis meter and proving system are functioning properly. Variations in the density factor from proving to proving, which exceed the defined limits, indicate that an increase in the frequency of meter provings may be necessary. Trend charting of density factors will be useful in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter’s density measurement. The trend chart should be developed with the density factor of the first proving as the centerline. Alternatively, the limits can be set around the average density factor from a sequence of periodic provings. Setting the acceptance limits will depend on the particular application, and the contract requirements. If the Coriolis meter’s accuracy specification of ±0.0005 g/cc is used, for a fluid with a density of 0.5 g/cc, the density factor acceptance limits would be ±0.001 or ±0.1%. A blank density factor trend chart is presented on page 193.

distinctly different densities. Air and water are commonly used to perform this verification. If the meter is emptied and thoroughly dried, and the air density measurement (determined from Equation 11-9, page 155) is incorrect, the meter must be recalibrated, using the procedures described in the HART Communicator or ProLink manual. If the air density is correct, the error is most likely in the water calibration. The sensor should be filled with distilled water, and the water density reading should be checked against water density versus temperature equations or tables. If the water density reading is incorrect, the meter must be recalibrated, using the procedures in the HART Communicator or ProLink manual. If the meter is recalibrated, it will be necessary to perform another density proving to reestablish the density factor. If the meter’s air and water density readings were correct, the source of the discrepancy between the pycnometer and the meter may be caused by a pressure effect or fluid velocity effect on the meter. Refer to Process Conditions, page 160, and Section G.2, page 228, for details on these influences. The simplest approach to adjusting the Coriolis meter’s density reading is to multiply the density factor by the Coriolis meter reading to obtain the true density, as shown in Equation 11-20. (Eq. 11-20)

ρ actual = DF * ρ measured

**Applying the Density Factor to Correct the Coriolis Meter Measurement
**

Using the density factor to correct the Coriolis meter density measurement is slightly more complex than applying a meter factor to correct flow measurement. The density measurement is determined from an equation that has a slope and an intercept. The only way to determine the source of a density measurement error is to check the Coriolis meter density reading at two

Applying the density factor in this manner adjusts the slope of the density equation, maintaining an intercept at the air density value.

**RFT9739 with Software Version 3.0 or Higher
**

Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3.0 and higher. The value input into the density factor (DF) register will correct both the digital and analog density outputs. If the density measurement is proved, the new density factor that is determined will be a composite of the density factor from the

158

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving
**

Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting

11

proving and the current density factor. In order to determine the new density factor, which should be entered in the density factor register, the following equation should be used: (Eq. 11-21)

DFnew = DF current * DFproving

**RFT9739 with Software Version Lower than 3.0
**

Model RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3.0 have no meter factor registers. To apply Equation 11-20, the density factor must be applied externally, by using a flow computer or similar computational device. For applications in which applying an external density factor is not desired, the density calibration can be adjusted by determining a new K2 density calibration factor, as shown in Equation 11-22. (Eq. 11-22)

K2 new = ( K2 old ) – ( K1 old ) 2 ----------------------------------------------------- + ( K1 old ) DF

2 2

where

DFcurrent= Density factor currently being used DFproving= Density factor from proving

Alternatively, the density can be set to 1.0000 during proving. Then the new density factor determined during proving would be entered into the density factor register. As discussed previously in Section 9.7, page 128, three correction factors are available: MFm, DF, and MFv . Since the volume is calculated from mass and density, the MFm and DF will automatically correct the meter’s volume measurement. If MFm or DF is entered, the MFv will automatically be reset to a value of 1.0000. However, if a volume meter factor (MFv) is entered, the MFm and DF registers will automatically be reset to a value of 1.0000. This was done to prevent the accidental application of multiple factors to the meter’s volume measurement.

Using this method will provide essentially the same result as applying a density factor, as shown in Equation 11-20, as long as the K1 density calibration factor was determined at a density close to 0.0 (such as for air). When using Equation 11-22, the slope of density Equation 11-1, page 141, rotates around the density point that was used to establish the K1 density calibration factor. A drawback of this approach is that a factory-determined calibration constant for the meter is being modified.

**11.5 Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting
**

This section summarizes the recommendations for using and proving Coriolis meters for density measurement. In addition, this section provides guidance on troubleshooting when proving problems are encountered. • For the ELITE CMF200 sensor, live pressure compensation should be employed if pressure variations greater than ±200 psig will be experienced. • A set of wires (“pigtail”) from the transmitter’s primary analog output should be routed to an appropriate connector or a conduit junction box, in a safe area, to allow access to HART communication without opening the transmitter housing. This will allow access to the density reading, output signals and other transmitter information. • A density damping factor of 0.5 or less should be used when performing density proving. • When proving the meter’s flow measurement on products that exhibit significant density variations (such as LPG,

Summary Recommendations

• ELITE meters and Model D600 sensors with RFT9739 transmitters are the best choice for density measurement. • The D600 density measurement is significantly biased by pressure. If the pressure varies by more than ±50 psig, the D600 should be pressure compensated with a live pressure measurement immediately downstream of the meter.

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

159

• Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. The damping value should be set to 0. Density Factor Offset When a meter is proved. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. • Allow the process fluid to flow through the meter for sufficient time to allow the flow tube temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature. either by erosion or corrosion. determine why. Pressure can affect both the mass flow and density measurements.0000. The following sections describe how to resolve the discrepancies listed above. then the source of discrepancy usually lies in one of the following areas: • Density calibration factors have been changed. If they have been changed. • Pycnometer calibration is incorrect. Density Calibration Factors Check to see if these factors have been changed. is recommended.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting ethylene. or very close to 1. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. a density averaging device. • Make sure to allow the process fluid to flow through the pycnometer for sufficient time to allow the pycnometer steel temperature to stabilize to the process fluid temperature. • The sensor flow tubes have been physically changed. the density factor should be 1. and reprove the density measurement. Process Conditions Pressure — After the density factors have been checked. Maintain sufficient pressure to keep the fluid from flashing. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1. the next thing that should be checked is the operating pressure. An increase in pressure has a stiffening effect on the sensor flow tubes. If the sensor being used is affected Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. • Difference between the factory calibration lab conditions and the operating process conditions has caused a shift in the Coriolis meter calibration. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate through the pycnometer is sufficient to provide a sample representative of the product flowing through the Coriolis meter. Coriolis meter 3. • The meter was previously miscalibrated. which in turn affects the volumetric flow measurement. Pycnometer • Ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer fittings or valves. Enter original factors back into the transmitter. Troubleshooting When proving a Coriolis meter’s density measurement. 160 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If it is not. • Make sure there is no condensation or contaminant on the outside of the pycnometer. as described on page 155. in the order in which they should be checked. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. • Field verification of the pycnometer’s evacuated weight is required. poor proving repeatability might be obtained.0000. Selecting the proper sensor can minimize or eliminate this influence. which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run.0000.5 or less. Pycnometer 2. liquid CO2). or from some type of coating.

refer to page 229 in Appendix G. This can be done by performing an air and water density measurement verification in the field. Refer to page 232 for additional details on the influence of fluid flow rate on density accuracy. or flow rate. Because the density measurement is based on frequency. the meter’s density calibration should be checked. a new calibration would be appropriate. Fluid Flow Rate — One other influence is the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. which is why many commercial density meters limit the maximum fluid flow rate and require a slipstream installation. results in a slight change in the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. this will create a small shift in the density measurement. The RFT9739 uses a three-point density calibration algorithm. If the meter will be used at flow rates higher than 50% of the sensor’s nominal rate. Flow Tube Changes Gradual changes in the density factor over time may be the result of flow tube erosion or corrosion. Increasing the fluid velocity. a change in the meter factor may indicate that the sensor flow tube wall thickness has been reduced. a density correction factor should be used. A solvent cleaning process may be necessary to remove materials that deposit on the flow tubes. Coatings will generally affect calibration only if the coating material has a different specific gravity than the process fluid. This influence only becomes significant at high fluid velocities (greater than 50% of the sensor’s nominal fullscale flow rate). which could lead to tube failure and the release of process fluid. This is accomplished by installing an external pressure transmitter close to the sensor. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 161 . and the meter is used for an abrasive or corrosive fluid. the sensor should be removed and hydrotested to ensure that it will continue to contain the maximum rated pressure. Calibration Finally. if the meter calibration is suspect. and wiring the pressure signal into the RFT9739 transmitter. If gradual changes in the meter factor are observed. which automatically compensates for the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. or by returning the meter to the factory. which would affect the mass balance of the sensor flow tubes.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting 11 by pressure. If the pycnometer has not been calibrated in some time. For information on the effects of pressure on density accuracy. an RFT9739 transmitter can be used to automatically compensate for pressure influence. If the fluid is highly abrasive or corrosive.

162 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . Volumetric Master Meter . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Prove . . . Buoyancy correction factors . Proving conversion factors.Appendix A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-1 Form A-2 Form A-3 Form A-4 Form A-5 Form A-6 Table A-1 Table A-2 Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . Small Volume Prover. . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass . . . . . 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 163 . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . .

164 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

gallons and g/cc. The forms use the units of lbs. When using weigh scales. Form A-6 shows the required calculations when proving the Coriolis meter volume against a weigh scale. for use in developing forms with other units of measure.Appendix A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement This appendix contains forms that can be used for proving the Coriolis meter’s volume measurement. and Form A-5 shows the calculation for proving the Coriolis meter volume against a master Coriolis meter measuring mass. a buoyancy correction must be applied. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 165 . Table A-1 provides conversion factors. Buoyancy factors are presented in Table A-2. These option were not covered in the primary text because they are not typical proving scenarios.

A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-1. g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) Run Number: Meter Pulses Temperature at Prover (°F) 1 2 3 4 5 Ctsp Ctlp Pressure at Prover (psig) Cpsp Cplp Temperature at Meter (°F) Ctlm Pressure at Meter (psig) Cplm Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp * Ctlp * Cplp Meter Volume (gal) = (Pulses/K-Factor) * Ctlm * Cplm Meter Factor = Prover Volume/Meter Volume MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (Pulsesmax – Pulsesmin) * 100 / Pulsesmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 166 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Serial No. Conventional Pipe Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. gal/min Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.

gal/min Meter Tag No. Meter Serial No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Run Number: Avg Meter Interpolated Pulses Avg Temperature at Prover (°F) Avg Ctsp Avg Ctlp Avg Pressure at Prover (psig) Avg Cpsp Avg Cplp Avg Temperature at Meter (°F) Avg Ctlm Avg Pressure at Meter (psig) Avg Cplm Avg Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp * Ctlp * Cplp Avg Meter Volume (gal) = (Pulses/K-Factor) * Ctlm * Cplm Avg Meter Factor = Prover Volume/Meter Volume MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (Pulsesmax – Pulsesmin) * 100 / Pulsesmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 167 . Small Volume Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flowe Rate Density Passes per Run gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-2.

Coriolis Meter Volume vs.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-3. Volumetric Tank Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. gal/min Meter Tag No. Meter Serial No. g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) Run Number: Total Meter Pulses Prover Fill Time (sec) Temperature at Prover (°F) 1 2 3 4 5 Ctsp Ctlp Pressure at Prover (psig) Cpsp Cplp Temperature at Meter (°F) Ctlm Pressure at Meter (psig) Cplm Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp * Ctlp * Cplp Meter Volume (gal) = (Pulses / K-Factor) * Ctlm * Cplm or = Totalizer Display Value * Ctlm * Cplm Meter Factor = Prover Volume / Meter Volume MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 /MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 168 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Run Number: Master Total Pulses Meter Total Pulses Test Time Temperature at Master (°F) Ctlp Pressure at Master (psig) Cplp Temperature at Meter (°F) Ctlm Pressure at Meter (psig) Cplm Master Volume (gal) = (Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor) * Ctlp * Cplp * MFmaster Meter Volume (gal) = (Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor) * Ctlm * Cplm Meter Factor = Master Volume / Meter Volume MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 169 .Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-4. Volumetric Master Meter Company Master Meter K-Factor Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Master Meter Factor (MFmaster ) pulse/gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. gal/min Meter Tag No. Meter Serial No.

gal/min Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. Coriolis Master Meter Mass Company Master Meter K-Factor Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Master Meter Factor (MFmaster ) pulse/lb pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Run Number: Master Total Pulses Meter Total Pulses Meter Density (g/cc) Test Time (sec) Master Mass (lb) = MFmaster * Master Pulses/Master K-Factor Meter Volume (gal) = Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor Meter Mass (lb) = Meter Volume * Density * 8.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-5.3454 Meter Factor = Master Mass/Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 170 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Serial No.

Meter Tag No. page 172 1 2 3 4 5 Corrected Scale Mass (lb) = Scale Total * Buoyancy Factor Meter Volume (gal) = Pulses / K-Factor or = Totalizer Display Value Meter Mass (lb) = Meter Volume * Density * 8.Scale Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 171 . Meter Serial No. Gravimetric Tank Prover Company Target Test Quantity Weigh Scale Resolution Meter K-Factor Flow Rate lb lb pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-6. gal/min Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) Run Number: Weigh Scale Total Meter Total Pulses Fill Time (sec) Meter Density (g/cc) Buoyancy Factor see Table A-2.3454 Meter Factor = Corr.

8 1.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.0009 1.098 Table A-2. g/cc 2.0014 1. kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0.9 1.6 1.0007 1.0 0.4 1.2 1.0007 1.0012 1.5 1. Proving conversion factors.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.0005 1. the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.7 0.0005 1.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement .0009 1.5 Correction Factor 1.0005 1.6 0. Density.0007 1.1 1. Table A-1.0019 1.0016 1.3 1.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.0011 1.0008 1.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101.999098 k/m³=SG * 999. Measurement Units Mass lb lb lb kg kg Volume gallons barrels cubic feet cubic meters liters Density* g/cc g/cc g/cc g/cc kg/m³ Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8.9 0. Buoyancy correction factors.7 1.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.0 1.8 0.0006 1.0023 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .001 * kg/m³ *If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity).

. .Appendix B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-1 Form B-2 Form B-3 Form B-4 Form B-5 Form B-6 Table B-1 Table B-2 Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 182 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 173 . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . Proving conversion factors. . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . Volumetric Master Meter . Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

174 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

and g/cc.Appendix B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement This appendix contains forms that can be used for proving the Coriolis meter’s mass mesurement. The forms use the units of lbs. gallons. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 175 . Table B-1 provides conversIon factors. for use in developing forms with other units of measure.

Conventional Pipe Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) gal pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs.3454 Meter Mass (lb) = (Pulses / K-Factor) Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin ) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 176 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Tag No.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-1. g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Run Number: Meter Pulses Density at Prover (g/cc) (Form C-2 may be required) Temperature at Prover (°F) Ctsp Pressure at Prover (psig) Cpsp Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp Prover Mass (lb) = Prover Volume * Density * DF * 8. Meter Serial No.

Coriolis Meter Mass vs.3454 Avg Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor Avg Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 177 . Meter Serial No. Meter Tag No.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-2. Small Volume Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Passes per Run Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) gal pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No. Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) Run Number: Avg Meter Interpolated Pulses Avg Density at Prover (g/cc) (Form C-2 may be required) 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Temperature at Prover (°F) Avg Ctsp Avg Pressure at Prover (psig) Avg Cpsp Avg Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp Avg Prover Mass (lb) = Prover Volume * Density * DF * 8.

3454 Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor or = Totalizer Display Value Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 178 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Tag No.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-3. Meter Serial No. Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Run Number: Total Meter Pulses Density at Prover (°F) (Form C-2 may be required) Prover Fill Time (sec) Temperature at Prover (°F) Ctsp Pressure at Prover (psig) Cpsp Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp Prover Mass (lb) = Prover Volume * Density * DF * 8. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Volumetric Tank Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) gal pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No.

Meter Serial No.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-4. Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5 Master Meter Factor (MFmaster ) Run Number: Master Pulses Meter Pulses Density at Master (g/cc) (Form C-2 may be required) Test Time (sec) Master Volume (gal) = Master Pulses / Master K-Factor Master Mass (lb) = Master Volume * Density * DF * 8. Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Volumetric Master Meter Company Master Meter K-Factor Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) Date pulse/gal pulse/lb lb/min Meter Model No.3454 * MFmaster Meter Mass (lb) = Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor Meter Factor = Master Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 179 .

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

**Form B-5. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Coriolis Master Meter Mass
**

Company Master Meter K-Factor Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Master Meter Factor (MFmaster ) pulse/lb pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No. Meter Serial No. Meter Tag No.

g/cc Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) 1 2 3 4 5

Run Number:

Master Total Pulses Meter Total Pulses Test Time (sec) Master Mass (lb) = MFmaster * Master Pulses / Master K-Factor Meter Mass (gal) = Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor Meter Factor = Master Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin

%

**For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value
**

= MFcurrent * MFproving

180

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

B

**Form B-6. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Gravimetric Tank Prover
**

Company Target Test Quantity Weigh Scale Resolution Meter K-Factor Flow Rate lb lb pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No. Meter Serial No. Meter Tag No. Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional)

Run Number:

Weigh Scale Total (lb) Meter Total Pulses Fill Time (sec) Fluid Density (g/cc) Buoyancy Factor

see Table B-2, page 182

1

2

3

4

5

Corrected Scale Mass (lb) = Scale Total * Buoyancy Factor Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor or = Totalizer Display Value Meter Factor = Corr. Scale Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin

%

**For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value
**

= MFcurrent * MFproving

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

181

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

**Table B-1. Proving conversion factors.
**

Measurement Units Mass lb lb lb kg kg Volume gallons barrels cubic feet cubic meters liters Density* g/cc g/cc g/cc g/cc kg/m³ Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0.001 * kg/m³

*If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity), the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.999098 k/m³=SG * 999.098

**Table B-2. Buoyancy correction factors.
**

Density, kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density, g/cc 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 Correction Factor 1.0005 1.0005 1.0005 1.0006 1.0007 1.0007 1.0007 1.0008 1.0009 1.0009 1.0011 1.0012 1.0014 1.0016 1.0019 1.0023

182

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Appendix

C

Proving Forms for Density Measurement

Form C-1 Form C-2

Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density conversion factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

186 187 187

Table C-1

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

183

184

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 185 .Appendix C Proving Forms for Density Measurement This appendix contains forms that can be used for proving the Coriolis meter’s density measurements.

: Current DF : (7. (PC ) Temperature correction. (Tp ) Pycnometer pressure. (Pp ) Ambient temperature g/cc °F psig °F psig °F = 0..02%) = Line 5 – (Line 4 * Line 1) = (Line 2 – Line 6) * 100 / Line 2 DENSITY METER PROVING Flowing Conditions 8 9 10 11 12 13 Observed Coriolis meter density.: PYCNOMETER DATA Report No.: Ep : Et : cm3 g ft g/cc g g % VERIFICATION OF PYCNOMETER EVALUATED WEIGHT (from certificate) (from certificate) Corrected Pycnometer Volume 14 15 16 Pressure correction. (Mf ) Fluid density.84 g/cc for SS) Date: Meter Tag No. ρTW : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pycnometer base volume. Wa Field-evacuated weight. PBV Pycnometer evaluated weight. (ρm ) Coriolis meter temperature. Temp. (CBW ) Fluid mass. (Wf ) Buoyancy correction. Field Wo Difference between field and certificate (≤0. ρA Pycnometer air-filled weight. Wo Elevation. (Pm ) Pycnometer temperature. (ρf ) Density factor. (TC ) Corrected volume. (DF ) = 1 – (Line 4 / ρTW ) = (Line 17 – Line 2) * Line 18 = Line 19 / Line 16 = Line 20 / Line 8 = (DFmax – DFmin) * 100 / DFmin = (DFrun1 + DFrun2) / 2 = DFcurrent * Line 23 % g = Ep * Line 12 = 1 + Et * (Line11 – Td ) = (Line 1 + Line 14) * Line 15 cm3 cm3 Fluid Weight 17 18 19 g Fluid Density 20 21 22 23 g/cc DF repeatability Average density factor RFT9739 Version 3 Transmitters 24 New density factory Comments WITNESS Signature Company Date 186 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . h Air density.: PBV (cm ): Wo (g): Ref.C Proving Forms for Density Measurement Form C-1.0012 * [1 – (0. (PVtp ) Fluid filled weight. (Tm ) Coriolis meter pressure. Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report Location: Product: CORIOLIS METER DATA Manufacturer: Model: Density of Test Weights. Td (°F): 3 Serial No.000032 * Line 3)] Serial No.

3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350. Meter Tag No. Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions Company Meter Model No. Date Run Number Coriolis Meter Density (g/cc) Temperature at Meter (°F) 1 2 3 4 5 Ctlm Pressure at Meter (psig) Cplm Temperature at Prover (°F) Ctlp Pressure at Prover (psig) Cplp Prover Density (g/cc) = (Meter Density * Ctlp * Cplp ) / (Ctlm * Cplm ) Table C-1. Density conversion factors.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.Proving Forms for Density Measurement C Form C-2. Meter Serial No. Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8.999098 * SG(15°C) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 187 .99012 * SG(60°F) g/cc = .428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc g/cc = .

188 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . .Appendix D Proving Charts Form D-1 Form D-2 Meter Factor Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 193 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 189 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Factor Chart . . . .

190 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

Appendix D Proving Charts This appendix contains forms that can be used for developing meter factor and density factor charts to allow the trending of meter performance from one proving to the next. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 191 .

Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.9975 0.00% 192 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .9950 0.10% 0.0075 1.0025 1.D Proving Charts Form D-1.0000 0.15% 0.0050 1. Meter Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co. Calibration Factor K–Factor Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Meter Factor Repeatability 0.9925 Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.05% 0.

15% 0.10% 0.0000 0.9970 Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Density Factor Repeatability 0.9980 0.Proving Charts D Form D-2.0010 1.00% Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 193 . Density Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.0020 1.0030 1.9990 0.05% 0. Prover Base Volume Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial Number Density Calibration Factor 1.

194 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example 2—Meter proving not required when meter is rezeroed Zero Considerations for Bi-Directional Flow . . . . Determining if the Meter Needs to be Rezeroed. . . .2 E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determining the Error Caused by a Zero Offset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed E. . . . Example 1—Meter proving required when meter is rezeroed . . . .6 E. . . . Meter Zero Procedure . . . . . Is Proving Required When the Meter is Rezeroed? . . . . . . Trending Zero Variation . . . . . . Viewing the Zero Reading. . . .9 Form E-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 195 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 E. . . . . .3 E. . . . .7 Overview . .4 E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero Chart . . . . . . . . 197 197 198 199 199 200 200 200 201 202 202 204 E. . . . . . . . . Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 E. .

196 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

The ∆tzero value is then used in Equation E-1 for computing the mass flow rate. performing the zeroing procedure while valves are not fully closed can result in an incorrect ∆tzero value. Influences on the meter zero are described starting on page 214. the baseline offset between the pickoffs (∆t) under no-flow conditions is determined. This process is called zeroing the meter. The remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. For example. • Using an external switch if one has been wired to the transmitter. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent ∆t measurements (∆tflow). • Using the scroll and reset functions. The purpose of this appendix is to help to evaluate the need for meter rezeroing. the following conditions must be met: 1. based on the sensor flow tube frequency. which would cause all subsequent measurements to be in error. it is recommended that no fewer than 2048 cycles be selected.) The meter can be zeroed in any of four ways: • Using the zero button on the transmitter electronics module (field-mount RFT9739 only). The sensor must be properly mounted in the pipeline. 4.2 Meter Zero Procedure For the ∆tzero value to be valid. 2. the average flow indication under no-flow Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 197 . E-1) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆tzero ) When the meter is initially installed it must be zeroed. The result of zeroing is that a ∆tzero value will be determined and be stored in a zero register. if the transmitter has a display. The sensor must be full of process fluid at typical process temperature and fluid density during the zeroing procedure. or if there are flow pulsations that would cause movement of fluid in the sensor.1 Overview As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. A valve downstream from the sensor must be closed to ensure there is no flow through the sensor during the zeroing procedure. E. When the meter is properly zeroed. It takes approximately 40 seconds for the tube to vibrate a total of 2048 cycles. (Eq. The sensor cable must be wired to the transmitter prior to applying power to the transmitter. 5. This is the default zeroing time. The zeroing operation takes approximately 40 seconds. Although the zeroing time and number of tube cycles can be specified by the user. Rezeroing of the meter should not be performed unless it is necessary. If it is not properly done it may introduce error. (It may be necessary to block the sensor in by closing an additional upstream valve if the fluid is extremely thermally expansive. • Using a HART Communicator. as indicated by Equation E-1. or another HART-compatible or Modbus-compatible master controller. the ProLink program. The transmitter must have been connected to power and warmed up for at least 30 minutes.Appendix E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed E. 3. in Appendix F.

it is likely that one or more of the following problems is present: (1) fluid is flowing through the sensor. then the meter should be rezeroed. Live zero can be viewed with a HART Communicator (under “Test Points” in the Diagnostics menu). or with the ProLink program (under “Test Points” in the Test menu). due to the inherent fluctuations in the meter’s flow rate indication. (2) excessive mounting stresses have been applied to the sensor. Due to this damping. The zero offset is then determined by averaging these values. E. However. Then the mass flow rate indication should be recorded over a period of 30 to 60 seconds. If a suitable zero cannot be obtained after three zeroing operations. it will take at least one minute after flow is halted before the live zero will be representative of the actual flow indication. or (3) there is a vibration interference with the sensor. The mass flow rate is then viewed in the process variables display using either a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. there will generally be a low level accumulation of totalizer counts from the meter. Model RFT9712 and earlier version RFT9739 transmitters do not have live zero registers. Extra damping has been applied to the live zero register to provide some internal averaging of the zero reading to make it more viewable. If flow through the meter is never halted (except to check the meter zero). and the degree of fluctuation from one reading to the next. The live zero is essentially the same as the meter’s mass flow rate indication. It may be necessary to increase the damping time to improve the readability of the zero flow value. a “live zero” register can be used to view the meter’s zero reading. It is important to record the observed value every time it changes.3 Viewing The Zero Reading For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters. Therefore. The flow indication may fluctuate between negative and positive values. It will be necessary to correct these problems before the meter can be put into service. The mass flow rate indication will be varying. the low-flow cutoff and damping values should be returned to their original values. depend on the mass flow rate damping setting. flow should be halted and the meter’s flow indication should be allowed to stabilize (up to one minute). live zero can be used to evaluate whether a valid zero value has been captured. To determine the meter’s zero offset for all transmitter versions. The flow rate reading will generally fluctuate around the zero value. but on average the indication should be very close to zero. Before putting the meter back into service. except there is no low-flow cutoff value applied to the measurement.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Viewing The Zero Reading conditions should be zero. it is possible to leave the low-flow cutoff at a value of zero. the flow rate will update more rapidly and subsequently will have greater variation between readings. 198 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the longer the time between updates and the more stable the output. The higher the damping value. With these transmitters. under no-flow conditions. With a lower damping factor. if flow is halted and no low-flow cutoff is applied. If this is not the case. the meter’s flow rate reading at zero flow can be observed by replacing the transmitter’s low-flow cutoff value with a value of zero. The update time of the mass flow rate process variable display.

Errors due to zero offset can be minimized by rezeroing the meter when a change occurs that could result in a shift in the meter’s “true zero” value. (The units shown on the form are lb/min. it has a minimal effect on meter accuracy at or near the sensor’s maximum specified flow rate. The lower graph is used for determining the percentage error that the meter zero reading creates. E-2) Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. The zero offset is the difference between the “stored zero” value and the “true zero” value. except zero. are shown. This chart is divided into three sections: 1. The impact on flow accuracy of a deviation in the meter’s “zero reading” can be determined from Equation E-2. the larger the zero offset error will become. page 204. There are no x-axis values shown. The calculated average reading approximates the zero offset.) No x-axis values. this difference is very small. E. It is important that the value entered here is in mass flow units. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing. and establishing requirements for rezeroing the meter. except zero.4 Determining the Error Caused by a Zero Offset It is common for the meter’s flow rate reading to deviate slightly from reading absolute zero flow. Generally. the meter should be rezeroed. Because the zero value is very small. (Eq. but any mass flow rate units can be used. The upper graph is used for entering the meter’s actual zero reading. The center of the chart is used for recording process data to determine if there is a dependence between the meter zero value and a particular process condition. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 199 . However.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate The average meter reading under no-flow conditions should be calculated from readings recorded over a 30.to 60-second time period. 3. because the magnitude of the zero offset is dependent on the sensor size and the process conditions. such as temperature. a large zero offset could occur if the meter is zeroed when (1) there is actually a small amount of fluid flowing through the sensor. is for tracking variations in the meter’s zero offset. not volume units. As is apparent from Equation E-2. based on the operating flow rate.5 Trending Zero Variation The chart provided in form E-1. the process conditions. the lower the operating flow rate. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor. and the operating flow rate. which would bring the “stored zero” very close to the “true zero” once again. because the magnitude of the zero offset error depends on the sensor.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Trending Zero Variation E E. If the zero offset error exceeds acceptable meter accuracy tolerances. 2. The need for rezeroing the meter will depend on the operating flow rate of the system.

and a 10 lb/min operating flow rate would result in a measurement error of 1. If the meter zero is consistently within tolerance over a period of one year. The need for reproving when the meter is rezeroed will depend on whether or not procedures are established for tracking the meter’s zero performance over time. Record the average zero value. Proper rezeroing of the meter will eliminate large zero offset errors. page 199. reducing the need to rezero the meter. 9. The average process conditions (temperature. To evaluate the need for rezeroing. page 198). This may require bypassing flow around the meter (see Section E. If the measurement error cannot be made to be within acceptable limits.7 Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? When the meter is initially put into service it must be zeroed and proved. and follow these steps: 1. 4.9980. contact the factory.1 lb/min. record the data collected from step 3 on form E-1.3. For example. Reinitiate flow through the meter. Halt flow through the meter. If desired. Now the meter has no zero offset error. Example 1 — Meter proving required when meter is rezeroed The meter was initially proved at a flow rate of 500 lb/min with a +1 lb/min zero offset that had not been characterized. Use Equation E-2. checking of the meter could then be discontinued. resulting in a meter factor of 0. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until the measurement error is within acceptable limits. double check to make sure valves are closed and there is no flow through the meter). the meter factor of 0. and density) should also be recorded. View the meter’s zero reading (see Section E. Examples are provided below which illustrate cases where meter proving is needed and where meter proving is not needed. If desired.6 Determining if the Meter Needs to be Rezeroed A zero offset will produce a greater error at low flow rates than at high flow rates. It is best to select a meter that will operate in its upper flow range.9980 would still be used and the meter output would be 200 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . If a zero offset creates an error that exceeds the acceptable accuracy tolerance.01%.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? E.2). The meter would be reading high by 0. page 204. 3. Restore any modifications to low-flow cutoff or damping to their original values. refer to Section E. 7. to calculate the measurement error from the average zero value and the operating flow rate. (Prior to rezeroing. the meter must be rezeroed to bring it into tolerance. 2. the meter should be able to continue to operate without rezeroing as long as the operating flow rate is not reduced substantially. 6.2. an operating flow rate of 1000 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. 5. Rezero the meter (Section E. record both sets of data — before and after zeroing — and indicate on the meter zero chart that the meter was rezeroed. If the meter was not reproved. whereas an operating flow rate of 100 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. determined from zero readings accumulated over a 30 to 60 second time period. 8. E. pressure. page 197. Before the next proving the meter was rezeroed and the zero offset of +1 lb/min was eliminated. If the meter was rezeroed. zero offset errors should be minimized. By operating the meter within a 10:1 turndown from its maximum specified flow rate.2) if the measurement error exceeds acceptable tolerance. to track the meter’s zero performance over time.0%.1%. if the meter had a zero offset of 0.2%.

Reproving should not be required as long as the new zero offset is very close to the value from the last proving and brings the error back within tolerance. One of the possible outcomes of this procedure is that tracking zero performance over a year or more could show that the zero never shifts enough to take the meter out of tolerance. From this example it is easy to see why proving would be required after the meter was rezeroed to determine the correct meter factor. In the majority of applications the meter will never need to be rezeroed. If the zero has shifted excessively. Prior to proving the meter the zero is checked. If the zero offset does not create an excessive error leave it alone. If the zero offset is excessive.5 lb/min. Apply the following procedure in between provings: a. Zero offset readings from all intermediate zero checks should be recorded.) Record the new zero offset on the proving sheet. The meter is rezeroed and afterwards the zero is checked again. c. d. b. Any meter zeroing procedure should also include viewing the meter’s zero reading to make sure that zeroing is really needed. Determine the meter’s average zero reading using the procedure described in Section E. The meter zero is checked after 2 weeks and is found to be offset by +0. (If the zero cannot be brought in tolerance there may still be flow in the pipeline or there may be something wrong with the meter. c. If necessary. The following procedures can be followed to eliminate the need to reprove the meter every time it is rezeroed. Zeroing issues are important primarily in applications when the meter is operating in the low end of its flow range and when the process temperature or density change significantly. Use Equation E-2. there is potential for incorrectly zeroing the meter if valves are not fully closed. Check the meter zero as described in Step 1a. rezero the meter. above. b. Check the zero offset using Equation E2. 2. The new offset is +0. The meter is checked again after the next 2 week period and found to be offset by +0. one may conclude that they should just establish a program to rezero the meter on a regular basis. page 198. It is determined that the error due to this offset is insignificant for the operating flow rate of 500 lb/min. In this case. Prove the meter. Repeat the procedure outline in Step 1a. It is determined that this zero offset would not require rezeroing the meter. Make sure to replace the old low flow cutoff after the proving session is complete.03 lb/min. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. above. the rezeroing maintenance procedure for the Coriolis meter could be eliminated.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? E corrected to make it read low by 0. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. to determine if this zero offset value is excessive. the meter does not need to be reproved every time it is rezeroed.05 lb/min zero offset. to make sure it has not drifted to make the meter fall out of acceptable tolerances.2%.3. This would result in a +0. Routine checks during proving would still be warranted.1% error at a flow rate of 500 lb/min. Example 2 — Meter proving not required when meter is rezeroed As part of the normal proving procedure the meter zero offset is checked and recorded. However. Since the meter is being monitored and excessive zero offsets are eliminated when they arise. 1. If necessary rezero the meter.1 lb/min. d. During a proving session do the following: a. so care must be taken in adopting a meter zeroing procedure. page 199. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 201 . Based on the examples above. until the zero is within tolerance. and it is found that there is a –0. page 199. A program has been put into place to check the meter zero every 2 weeks.

Flowing into the cavern. Also assume that the same +1 lb/min zero offset (+0. both in and out of the cavern. most cavern storage applications have widely varying flow rates.800 lb. As an illustration. However.3. The total uncertainty for an ELITE master meter is obtained from the following equation: 202 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . • The master meter must be zeroed every time it is moved to a new location. A zero offset will affect the accuracy of the meter and will be passed on to the meter being proved.000 lb of product flows into the cavern at a rate of 500 lb/min and 100. It is important to make sure the meter is properly zeroed. • The master meter offset should be checked as described in Section E.9 Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Proper meter zeroing is critical for Coriolis master meters. • It is also recommended that the test meter’s zero offset be checked as described in Section E. Special consideration should be given to the meter zero for these types of applications. the master meter must be full of process fluid at the normal process temperature. Determining different meter factors for the forward and reverse direction is of little use if the flow rate is varying significantly. Flowing into the cavern. page 198. Cavern Storage Example A meter has a +1 lb/min zero offset that has not been characterized.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E. if the meter is not properly zeroed.2% error in and –1.000 lb. page 217).2% error out). page 198. assume that 100. the meter factor should not change significantly between the forward and reverse direction.200 and flowing out it would deduct only 99. As flow rate decreases the zero uncertainty component increases.000 lb of product flows into the cavern and 100. • Before zeroing. unloading and cavern storage.8 Zero Considerations for Bi-directional Flow The meter is often used to measure bidirectional flow for loading. • Prove the test meter against the master meter at the highest achievable flow rate to minimize the contribution of meter zero to the master meter uncertainty. Assume that 100. Not having the meter properly zeroed can result in large errors.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of 500 lb/min (+0. which results in a +0. The master meter uncertainty is the composite of the base uncertainty and the zero uncertainty.200 lb and flowing out the meter would deduct only 99.0% error out). The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of only 100 lb/min. The following hypothetical case is presented to illustrate some key points.2% error in and –0. The guidelines below should be followed when using a Coriolis master meter. The normal operating flow rate is 500 lb/min.2% error in the reverse flow direction. To compound the problem.2% error in the forward flow direction and a –0. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. different proving meter factors can be obtained for the forward and reverse flow directions. page 217). The best way to eliminate these types of errors is to establish a meter zeroing procedure in conjunction with meter proving. The net error would be 1200 lb. E.3. The average zero offset must fall within Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. If the meter has been zeroed properly. the meter would register 100. the meter would register 100. It has been verified experimentally that a Coriolis meter’s flow calibration factor is unaffected by flow direction. especially in applications where the flow rate fluctuates greatly. The average zero offset should also fall with Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. The net error would be 400 lb.

25%.* 100 Mass Flow Rate Minimum mass flow rate = 166. the mass flow rate must equal or exceed 166. The proving flow rate must exceed the minimum mass flow rate of both the test meter and master meter.1% + --------------------------------------------. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 203 . it is specified that the maximum allowable uncertainty is ±0.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E (Eq.* 100 Mass Flow Rate It is recommended that a minimum allowable flow rate for both the master meter and the test meter be established.25 lb/min ± 0.1% + --------------------------------------------. E-3) Zero Stability Uncertainty% = ± 0.7 lb/min In order to achieve an uncertainty of ±0. Substitute the uncertainty and the zero stability into Equation E-3 and solve for the mass flow rate: 0.7 lb/min.25 lb/min. If the master meter is a CMF300. For example.25% or less. the zero stability is ±0.25 % = ± 0.

00 Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate 204 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Zero Chart Location Sensor Model Sensor Serial No.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Form E-1.00 Operating Flow Rate: Was meter rezeroed? 0. Fluid Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No. Average Zero Reading (lb/min) Date: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Zero Offset Factor (%) 0.

. . . . . . Temperature Effect On Zero Offset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure . . . . . . Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . Mounting for sensor vibration isolation . . . . . . Zero Stability or Zero Uncertainty . . . . . . . . Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix F Mass Flow Measurement F. . . . Zero uncertainty specifications . . . . Vibration. . . . . . . . Coating/Plugging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Profile . Pressure coefficients for flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of Sound . . . Corrosion . . . . . Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 210 211 211 212 214 214 215 216 217 218 218 220 220 220 220 221 221 221 207 208 209 211 212 213 214 215 216 219 210 217 219 Figure F-1 Figure F-2 Figure F-3 Figure F-4 Figure F-5 Figure F-6a Figure F-6b Figure F-7 Figure F-8 Figure F-9 Table F-1 Table F-2 Table F-3 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 205 . . . . Temperature effect on mass flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on Tube Stiffness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 F. Simplified model of an operating Coriolis sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement. . . . . . . . Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Influences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset . . . Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors. . . . . . .

206 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

Finally. The alternating magnetic field causes the fixed magnet mounted on the other tube to be alternately repelled and attracted. The transmitter is an electronics assembly that is connected to the sensor with a cable.1 Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement A Coriolis meter consists of two primary components: a sensor and a transmitter. a Coriolis force is produced. The sensor consists of a flow tube assembly. The flow tubes are vibrated in opposition to one another. The sensor and transmitter are both required for flow measurement. This motion is shown in Figure F-2. the transmitter produces output signals that represent the mass flow rate of the fluid flowing through the sensor tubes.Appendix F Mass Flow Measurement F. which represents a simplistic model of a Coriolis meter. which permits it to be located remotely from the sensor. The transmitter provides energy to oscillate the sensor flow tubes. generating an alternating magnetic field in the coil. The Coriolis force causes Figure F-1. Flow detectors (pickoffs) mounted on the flow tubes produce electrical signals. The primary components of a typical Coriolis sensor are presented in Figure F-1. Pickoff coil and magnet Flow tubes Pickoff coil and magnet Drive coil and magnet Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 207 . Shown is an ELITE® CMF300 sensor. The transmitter provides alternating current to the drive coil. encased in a housing and installed in the process pipeline. page 208. at their natural frequency. which is mounted on one of the flow tubes. The sensor reacts to the Coriolis forces produced by the fluid flowing through the oscillating flow tubes. When fluid flows through the vibrating sensor flow tubes. which are received and processed by the transmitter. Components of a Coriolis flow sensor. forcing the tubes first away from and then toward one another in a sinusoidal manner.

and determines the time difference (∆t) between the movement of the inlet and outlet flow tube legs. Vibration of flow tubes. Sensor Model Inlet pickoff Drive coil Outlet pickoff Flow Tubes Pickoff Signals 1 f No flow Fd Inlet and outlet pickoff signals Flow Fd ∆t Inlet pickoff signal Outlet pickoff signal the inlet and outlet legs of the sensor flow tube to be deflected in opposite directions. The pickoffs are comprised of a coil. mounted on one flow tube. and the outputs to external devices. The pickoffs produce a sinusoidal voltage signal. The transmitter processes the sine wave signals from the pickoffs (see Figure F-2). This time difference is directly proportional to the mass flow rate of fluid through the flow tubes. (Eq. there is no time difference between the two pickoff signals.F Mass Flow Measurement Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement Figure F-2. If fluid is not flowing. The amount of flow tube deflection caused by the Coriolis force is measured by the pickoffs. mounted on the other flow tube. pickoffs. which represents the motion of the flow tube. which are placed on the inlet and outlet legs of the sensor flow tubes. Mathematically. F-1) · m = Kcal ( ∆t ) 208 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The primary interfaces between the transmitter and the sensor are the drive coil. the signal processing section. The transmitter is comprised of three main parts: the signal interface to the sensor. and signals from pickoffs. As the mass flow rate through the oscillating tubes increases. the mass flow rate measurement can be expressed simply as Equation F-1. and a magnet. and the RTD (which is used for flow tube temperature measurement). This equation is idealized. Figure F-3 is a block diagram that shows the signal processing by the transmitter to produce a mass flow measurement. the relative offset in position from one leg of the tube to the other increases. Simplified model of an operating Coriolis sensor. are represented. and does not take into consideration any effects of temperature or pressure on the sensor.

The equation used for determining the mass flow rate of the fluid flowing through the meter is shown as Equation F-2. RFT9739 signal processing block diagram. F-2) · m = Kcal ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) * ( 1 – KT * 0. Sensor Interface Transmitter Signal processing Precision oscillator Microprocess or Frequency ρ Counter Inlet pickoff Signal amplifier Pickoff comparator Outlet pickof Signal amplifier Outputs Drive coil Drive control Q q Analog (4-20 mA) · m M RS-485/ RS-232 Flow tube temperature Temperature amplifier A/D converter T Alarm External pressure (optional) Analog or HART A/D converter P (optiona where · m Kcal ∆t = Mass flow rate (g/s) = Meter calibration constant (g/s/µs) = Time difference between pickoff signals (µs) Taking into account the effects of temperature and pressure on the sensor and meter zeroing.Mass Flow Measurement Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement F Figure F-3. (Eq.01 ( Pmeas – Pcal ) ] where ∆tflow ∆tzero KT T KP Pmeas Pcal = = = = = = = Time difference under flowing conditions (µs) Time difference under no-flow conditions (µs) Temperature coefficient for flow (% /100°C) Measured flow tube temperature (°C) Pressure coefficient for flow (% /psig) Measured pressure under flowing conditions (psig) Pressure during calibration (psig) — factory calibration at 20 psig Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 209 . Equation F-1 can be modified.0001 * T ) * [ 1 + K P * 0.

Pressure coefficient. KP — The pressure coefficient compensates for the influence of fluid pressure on the stiffness of the flow tube. increasing the temperature of the flow tube will cause it to deflect a greater amount. The unit of measure is grams per second flow per microsecond of time difference (g/s/µs). determined by zeroing the Coriolis meter at startup. (Pressure input is shown in the lower functional blocks in Figure F-3. page 209 (KP . Key parameters of Equation F-2 are discussed below. the tube becomes more elastic. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor.0008 0. The value of the correction coefficient varies from one sensor size to the next.005 0. Kcal — The calibration constant is a factor that is used for converting the time difference measured between the two pickoff signals to units of mass flow rate.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The Coriolis force depends only on the mass flow rate of the fluid. Pressure coefficients for flow. Pmeas and Pcal). Table F-1 lists pressure coefficients for Micro Motion flow sensors that are affected by pressure. As pressure increases. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. are always used in the mass flow rate computation. are used only for specific sensors and applications that warrant pressure compensation. Sensor Model D300 and DL200 D600 and DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient*. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. As temperature decreases. where it is used in the calculation of the mass flow rate. KT and T (obtained from the sensor RTD). The value of the temperature coefficient is different for different flow tube materials. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. Each sensor model behaves somewhat differently when fluid properties change. The pressure components of Equation F-2. KT — The temperature coefficient compensates for the influence of tube temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube material. (Refer to Appendix E.) The need for pressure correction is dependent on the sensor size and model.009 0. increasing the pressure inside the flow tube will cause it to deflect less. the larger the value of this factor. KP 0.) Temperature coefficient. However. the flow tube becomes stiffer. making it more difficult to be deflected. Meter zero. page 209. the deformation of the sensor flow tubes in response to the Coriolis force is influenced by the process conditions to which the tubes are subjected.0002 0.79% per 100°C change in temperature. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. which would be interpreted as an increase in the mass flow rate. The factor is different for each individual sensor. The larger the sensor. The temperature signal from the RTD mounted on the flow tube is used by the transmitter to correct for the effect of temperature variations. 210 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0006 *Percent offset per psi pressure F. and is independent of changes in fluid properties.26% per 100°C change in temperature. which would be interpreted as a decrease in the mass flow rate. As temperature increases. Table F-1. Calibration constant. Pressure correction is generally required only for 2-inch and larger sensors. The value of the calibration constant is determined when the meter is calibrated. The pressure measurement from an external pressure transducer can be input to the transmitter.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The values ∆tzero. the tube becomes stiffer. page 195. and for Model DL sensors. for information about zeroing the meter. tzero — The zero value represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs under no-flow conditions.

as more research is conducted and subtleties of the meters’ operation are better understood. The effects of temperature and pressure are systematic and can be characterized and compensated for. Assuming a constant mass flow rate. and can be readily characterized.5 0 -0. The effects of temperature on the mass flow rate measurement is a linear effect. The magnitude of these influences will vary from one sensor design to another. 2. to minimize or eliminate their influence on the accuracy of the meter. As temperature increase the tube will become more elastic. page 209. These explanations are likely to be expanded in the future. and geometric design. Figure F-4 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s flow rate measurement for stainless steel and Hastelloy sensors with no temperature compensation. which increases the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. Influences on Tube Stiffness Variations in temperature and pressure will change the flexibility or stiffness of the oscillating tube. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. and depends on tube material. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. As indicated by Equation F2. Since the mass flow rate has not Figure F-4.5 1 0.5 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 316L Hastelloy C-22 Temperature (°F) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 211 . wall thickness. Additional factors that may affect performance of the meter include: • • • • Entrained gas in the fluid External vibration Erosive properties of the fluid Coating/plugging of the flow tubes changed.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Changes in fluid properties usually affect the flexibility (stiffness) of the oscillating tube and/or the zero flow offset between the sensor pickoffs. The descriptions of these influences presented in the following sections are based on the current understanding of the sensor dynamics. there will be a measurement error. which will cause the relative offset between the two sides of the oscillating tube to vary. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. Temperature effect on mass flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.5 2 Mass flow rate error (%) 1. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly on page 210. temperature and pressure are the primary influence factors on mass flow measurement. a change in temperature or pressure will change the stiffness of the tube. This will lead to a change in the ∆t between the pickoffs.

DL100. geometry.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 CMF300 D600 Pressure (psig) 212 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Table F-1. page 210. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress (acting perpendicular to the tube wall).2 -0. However.4 -0. which reduces the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. page 214. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube.2 0. Figure F-5 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. and F-6b. The flow tube wall thickness. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing).1 -0. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. and DL200 sensors are significantly impacted by pressure. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed: a pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the meter as possible.1 Mass flow rate error (%) 0 -0. and a pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. The effect on ELITE CMF100. However. page 213. Figures F-6a. diameter. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. The transmitter then automatically compensates for pressure.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms. D600. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter. CMF200. CEQ 6079 transmitter is capable only of reading pressure from a HART Bell 202 output.) Figure F-5. Only Model D300. In bent-tube designs. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. (The RFT9712. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation. and CMF300 sensors is an order of magnitude less than for the Model D sensors. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the mass flow rate measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. 0.3 -0. show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter.

The PV output will be driven to 4 mA in this case. and does not disable the RFT9739 PV output. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0. This method is only acceptable if the process pressure remains fairly constant (±10 psi for D300 and D600 sensors. Therefore.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. the RFT9739 provides DC power to the pressure transmitter. If a 4-20 mA pressure signal input is used.5W If a HART output is used. ±300 psi for CMF100 sensors).Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Figure F-6a.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. Using a direct 4-20 mA input is preferable to the HART polling method described above. as shown in Figure F-6a. because it is easier to wire. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. the pressure measurement is brought in as a multidrop connection on the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. provides faster response time. page 214. The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. ±100 psi for CMF200 and CMF300 sensors.5W 24 VDC RFT9739 field-mount Power supply Flow P RFT9739 rack-mount CN2 Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) Power supply 24 VDC D30 Z30 250Ω ±5% 0. In the 4-20 mA input configuration. The multidrop connection provides the pressure measurement from the pressure transducer using HART communication for polling. An alternative to on-line compensation is to determine a new meter flow calibration factor at the operating process fluid pressure. the wiring will be connected as illustrated in Figure F-6b. and cannot be used as a process variable output. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 213 . eliminating the need for an external power supply. It is important to configure both the pressure transducer and the RFT9739 with unique (non-zero) communication “addresses” to allow communication.

Zero Stability or Zero Uncertainty The zero stability specification for the meter represents the range of “stored zero” (∆tzero) values that would be obtained from zeroing 214 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . for a stable set of process and installation conditions. This calculation is presented in Equation F-2. the baseline offset between the pickoff sensors under no-flow conditions is determined. because it is likely that a more accurate zero value could be obtained. The meter’s zero stability. page 195. It does not describe an actual zero error. The remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. This process is called zeroing the meter. or zero uncertainty. which is the nominal uncertainty equation for Coriolis meters. The variation in ∆tzero values is the result of limitations in the transmitter’s ability to sample and precisely measure the small signal levels from the pickoffs at zero flow.) the meter a number of times in succession under constant process conditions.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Figure F-6b. (For additional information about meter zeroing. P RFT9739 field-mount Pressure transmitter 4-20 mA terminals Flow Flow P RFT9739 rack-mount CN2 Z6 Pressure transmitter 4-20 mA terminals Z20 Meter Zero Influences As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. The effect of zero stability on the accuracy of the meter can be understood by examining Equation F-3. page 209. represents the maximum anticipated variation in the meter’s stored zero. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent time difference measurements (∆tflow). see Appendix E. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input.

the measurement error can be calculated using Equation F-4. and reading the meter’s mass flow rate indication (as described in Section E. the transmitter will capture the “true zero” value. Generally. as described below. Figure F-7. F-3) Zero Stability Nominal Uncertainty (%) = ± Base Uncertainty (%) + --------------------------------------------.15%) from the sensor’s specified maximum flow rate down to a flow rate of zero. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor. This relationship is illustrated in Figure F-7.2 -0. ±0. determined from individual sensor specifications (±0.15% for Model D sensors) Zero Stability = Determined from individual sensor specifications Mass Flow Rate = Operating flow rate From Equation F-3.8 0.6 0. page 198).Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F (Eq. it can be seen that a decrease in the mass flow rate will result in an increase in the magnitude of the zero stability component in the nominal uncertainty equation. a zero offset will skew the nominal meter uncertainty. expressed as a percentage. If the meter is zeroed perfectly. a large zero offset could occur if the meter is zeroed when (1) there is actually a small amount of fluid flowing through the sensor.10% or ±0.10% for ELITE sensors.* 100 Mass Flow Rate where Base Uncertainty = Accuracy of sensor. Once the amount of zero offset has been determined. However.6 -0.4 0. assuming that a “normal” zero value has been captured by the transmitter.3. page 216. However. The illustrated boundaries do not represent a signature curve for Coriolis meters. this difference is very small.4 -0. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing. Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors. The amount of zero offset can be determined by halting flow through the meter completely. It is important to understand that the boundaries shown in Figure F-7 represent the uncertainty in the meter’s measurement. and the meter calibration will fall within the base uncertainty (±0.8 -1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Nominal full-scale flow rate (%) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 215 . Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset The zero offset is the difference between the “stored zero” value and the “true zero” value. 1 Nominal meter uncertainty (%) 0. which represents the nominal uncertainty boundaries for a Coriolis meter.2 0 -0.

which would cause the curve presented in Figure F-8 to return to the nominal uncertainty curve presented in Figure F-7. the meter must be rezeroed.5 1 0. In order to obtain an accurate zero. it is imperative that there be no fluid flow through the sensor. Figure F-8. Furthermore. serviced.) A less predictable cause of a zero offset is a change in flow tube temperature.1% of nominal full-scale flow. which is interpreted as flow and results in a change in the meter’s “true zero” value. page 215. F-4) Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. Zero offset errors can be eliminated by rezeroing the meter. As a result. Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor — based on an assumed zero offset of +0. which is discussed below. Testing has been conducted on sensors to characterize the relationship between zero offset and temperature. Micro Motion’s uncertainty specification for the effect of temperature on the meter zero is presented in Table F-2. if the sensor mounting is changed or the sensor or transmitter is removed. page 195. typical uncertainty limits have been established. see Appendix E.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 Zero offset error (%) • Zero offset error – Uncertainty limit Nominal full-scale flow rate (%) 216 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The exact mechanism by which temperature affects the meter zero is not fully understood. repaired. This graph illustrates the error that would result if the meter zero was offset by +0.1% of the meter’s nominal full-scale flow rate. It is likely that temperature variations change the stresses in the flow tubes. The uncertainty limits were then determined from Equation F-3. 2. The zero offset error points shown in Figure F-8 were determined by calculating the zero offset using Equation F-4. The magnitude of the drift and the direction of the drift varies from one sensor to the next.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate The impact of a hypothetical large zero offset on meter accuracy is illustrated in Figure F-8.5 2 1. Temperature Effect On Zero Offset A change in temperature away from the temperature at which the meter was zeroed can result in the “true zero” drifting away from the “stored zero” value. or otherwise altered. which presents measurement error and uncertainty. (For information about rezeroing. page 215.5 0 -0. These changes in stress levels can result in slight variations in the location of the pickoff detectors relative to one another.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy (Eq.

Legal trade requirements prohibit rezeroing the meter. The need for rezeroing will depend upon the characteristics of the sensor.08 ±0.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Table F-2.00125 ±0. lb/min = Zero offset uncertainty for the effect of temperature on the meter zero. (Eq. ELITE meters should be selected because they have lower zero offset uncertainty versus temperature than Model D meters. For applications that require a larger turndown.10 ±0. the less impact a zero offset will have. °C It should be kept in mind that Equation F-5 describes the maximum uncertainty for all sensors. Assessing the need for rezeroing is described in Appendix E.05 ±0. the amount of temperature variation and the operating flow rates. Such applications generally have steady process conditions (temperature.016 ±0. Any zero offset error is eliminated by rezeroing the meter at the new process temperature. Temperature-related zero offset errors will be minimized by rezeroing the meter. and can be used to compute the total meter uncertainty for varying operating temperatures.15 [B] Zero Stability (lb/min) ±0. The higher the operating flow rate. % = Zero stability. therefore. product composition) and. Table F-2 also lists the meter base uncertainty and zero stability values. Other Influences The following sections discuss other process variables and installation conditions that might affect the accuracy of the meter.* 100 Total Uncertainty (%) = ± Operating Mass Flow Rate where A B C = Base uncertainty. F-5) 2 2 B + ( C * Toperating – T zero ) A + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. Not every sensor will exhibit this amount of error. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 217 . [A] Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Nominal Full-Scale Flow Rate (lb/min) 500 1600 5000 25. and the magnitude of their impact will vary greatly from one application to the next.10 ±0.5 [C] Zero Offset Uncertainty for Temperature Effect* (lb/min/ °C) ±0. Zero uncertainty specifications.025 ±0.5 *Worst-case zero offset due to process fluid temperature change away from the zeroing temperature. lb/min/ °C Toperating = Operating process fluid temperature. unless the meter calibration is recertified. typically do not require rezeroing. These influences are not well defined.10 ±0. The total uncertainty for the meter’s mass flow measurement is determined using Equation F-5 and the values in Table F-2. page 195.25 ±2. °C Tzero = Temperature at which the meter was zeroed. pressure.000 Base Uncertainty (%) ±0.

are: measurement errors will start to occur at approximately 1 to 3 percent gas by volume. This is called drive saturation. because the fluid has a greater influence on the overall mass of the system (tube and fluid) as the tube size increases. the meter is no longer capable of making a measurement. In severely vibrating pipelines. A point can be reached where the tubes will no longer vibrate at the design amplitude.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas Mixtures of gas and liquid in the sensor can be a significant problem. sensors are often installed where they are exposed to external vibrations. Due to intrinsic safety limitations. A sensor’s sensitivity to entrained gas is difficult to determine. At some point. creating more of an emulsion. stratified. Performance ranges for a sensor’s ability to handle entrained gas. The shorter the batch the worse the repeatability will become. it is advisable to install adequate vibration isolation for a Coriolis sensor in an environment where piping and other process equipment have experienced vibration-related failures. because it is dependent on so many variables: • • • • • Sensor size and model Fluid viscosity Fluid flow rate Fluid surface tension Characteristics of gas (bubble size. well mixed. It also has been found that measurement errors could occur if the sensor is subjected to external vibrations at or near the vibration frequency of the oscillating tubes or one of 218 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The sensor will perform better in these types of applications than in those where the gas easily breaks out and accumulates. If it exceeds 13 volts DC. yet they provide excellent performance. This does not affect the flow measurement accuracy. Entrained gas causes the meter reading to be low until the meter reaches the drive saturation point. Sensors are designed to withstand vibrational amplitudes associated with good pipeline practices. the sensor can be isolated from the vibration with flexible piping and vibration isolating pipe supports. page 219. In general. Vibration Because Coriolis sensors operate by vibrating the flow tubes. Actually. which requires the drive circuitry to output more energy to keep the tubes vibrating.) • Fluid pressure Larger sensors have a lower tolerance for entrained gas than smaller meters. etc. the tube vibration will drop below a measurable level. a common misconception is that they will not function properly in an environment that is subject to vibration. The meter drive gain reading can be used for determining whether drive saturation is occurring. but will result in a degradation in repeatability as the run time is decreased. The transmitter will automatically indicate an error condition when the drive becomes saturated. The drive gain should normally be between 3 and 4 volts DC. Once this occurs. However. Significant measurement errors will occur as the tube amplitude decreases. fluids with higher surface tension will tend to create a more uniform dispersion of any entrained gas in the fluid. based on tests performed with air and water. Once drive saturation occurs. and the flow tube will stop vibrating at 5 to 15 percent gas by volume. the measurement accuracy of the meter will begin to degrade. severe drive saturation has occurred. the amount of current that can be supplied to vibrate the tubes is limited. Vibration testing has revealed that the introduction of random vibration can increase the variation in the meter’s flow measurement indication. The combination of gas and liquid dampens the vibration of the sensor flow tubes. even though the maximum power is being applied to the driver. at which time the output becomes unpredictable. The transmitter’s slug flow cutoff function can be used to force the meter output to indicate zero flow and a fault condition when entrained gas or slugs of gas interfere with the meter measurement. as illustrated in Figure F-9. For proving applications this can result in unacceptable repeatability.

Table F-3. It is easily diagnosed by disconnecting power from one of the meters. and proving the other and vice-versa. but has been minimized with ELITE sensors.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 219 . This problem. Sensor. Sensors of the same size and model operate at very similar frequencies. in the event that the pipeline frequency affects the operation of the meter. Vibration cannot transfer to sensor. which in some cases can lead to measurement errors. as a unit.8 g/cc 159 139 157 135 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 ρ = 0. it might be possible to apply rigid clamps to the piping to change the frequency being transmitted down the pipeline. this indicates that there is a cross-talk problem. Another vibration-related problem is encountered when multiple sensors are installed in the same pipeline. Structural mounting supports Vibration isolation with flex hose or elastomeric coupling Load-bearing vibration isolators (such as Lord sandwich mounts) the harmonics of this frequency. from the pipeline and ground. It is uncommon to find a pipeline that transmits enough vibrational energy at the operating frequency of the sensor to affect the performance of the meter. If proving repeatability becomes acceptable. is fairly common with Model D sensors. Mounting for sensor vibration isolation. The sensors can transmit enough vibrational energy through the pipeline to excite one another. known as cross-talk. sensor connections. This will usually show up as poor repeatability when the meter is proved. Cross-talk will usually manifest itself as an increased variation in the meter’s flow measurement outputs.0012 g/cc ρ = 0. However. Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor Tube Frequencies (Hz) ρ = 0. Typical sensor operating frequencies. and connected piping are isolated.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Figure F-9. Table F-3 presents typical operating frequencies for ELITE and Model D600 sensors. The susceptibility of the sensor to vibration will vary from one design to another.

In some instances. For a process fluid that has a tendency to 220 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Although viscosity influences have been reported. there have been cases where both modes have required isolation. A report on testing conducted with different fluid viscosities. the impact of varying fluid density on meter accuracy is negligible. no documented test data have been produced to confirm these claims. Flexible hose. This condition usually results when the sensor flow tube diameter is much smaller than the diameter of the process piping. can be used to isolate the sensor from the piping. precautions should be taken to vibrationally isolate sensors from one another. such as Lord Industrial Products sandwich mounts. Index #3. Calibration tests have been conducted at a number of different test facilities. Therefore. or an elastomeric bellows like those used for thermal expansion joints. Test meters have also been used on a wide variety of fluids ranging from laminar to turbulent flow with no apparent impact on performance. The ratio of tube surface area to fluid volume increases as the tube diameter decreases. Coriolis meters are currently used on a wide variety of viscous products and exhibit excellent accuracy.6. page 195. Refer to the following document: “The ELITE Mass Flowmeter. As stated previously. which showed no accuracy shifts. which assists heat loss and product solidification. Figure F-9 illustrates how to provide vibration isolation. Loadbearing mounts. but it is likely caused when the variation in mass loading produces a change in sensor stresses. only one mode of transmission needs to be isolated: either piping or mounting.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy In order to prevent cross-talk from occurring. can be used to isolate the sensor from any transmission through the pipe mounts. is available. and no significant variation in meter performance from one facility to the next has been observed. creating a small zero offset. in smaller diameter flow tubes. It has not been established if fluid viscosity has any influence on the calibration factor or the zero offset. Viscosity Very little documented information is available on the effect of fluid viscosity on the accuracy of Coriolis meters. the sensor flow tubes will actually become plugged. Changes in the fluid density can cause the “true zero” of the meter to change slightly. Density Variations in the density of the process fluid cause the mass of the flow tube/fluid system to change. it might be necessary to rezero the meter. Flow Profile Limited testing has been conducted on the influence of flow profile variations on the accuracy of Coriolis meters. However. October 1993.” TNO report E 2620 T 93. The objective of applying vibration isolation is to attenuate the transmission frequency. An alternative approach is to obtain sensors which have sufficiently different natural frequencies that minimize cross-talk. Use the information presented in Appendix E. The sensors have been designed to minimize the influence of changing fluid mass. If the fluid density varies significantly. published by WIB. through geometric design and mass balancing of the sensor tubes. this is generally only required for Model D sensors. Generally. which can alter the mass balance of the sensor. to evaluate whether or not rezeroing is required. Therefore. The following paper provides test data on Coriolis meters with a variety of upstream piping configurations: “The Effect of Swirl on Coriolis Meters. all with different piping arrangements. Coating/Plugging Some process fluids have a tendency to coat the flow tubes or harden inside the flow tubes. preventing flow through the sensor. Contact the factory and request information on Custom Engineering Quotation (CEQ) 7146300 for additional details to determine if this approach is suitable for your application. the fluid will be exposed to a greater surface area. Model CMF300.” Proceedings of the 1995 North Sea Workshop. It is important to properly apply the vibration isolating components to accomplish this task. The mechanism that causes this zero offset is not well understood.

A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions. even when one of the tubes is plugged. A system to monitor pressure drop through the meter can be used to establish cleaning requirements. a sensor should be selected that has a flow tube inner diameter that is as close as possible to the inner diameter of the process piping. a routine cleaning procedure can be followed. This can also lead to measurement errors. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure. In an environment where there were no alternating stresses or very low stresses. the tube vibration may be dampened. Also. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. Also. the flow rate through the system will be significantly diminished due to the reduced flow path through the sensor. your sales representative. Erosion reduces the flow tube wall Velocity of Sound Velocity of sound influences are related to the localized compression and decompression of fluid at the surface of the flow tube as the tube vibrates back and forth. preventing the tubes from vibrating in a normal fashion. However. In this type of corrosion. Corrosion The vibration of the sensor flow tubes results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes. If the coating density is different from the process fluid density. ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22. the meter will usually measure flow properly. Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. However. Erosion Coriolis meters can be used to measure solid/liquid mixtures that contain extremely abrasive solids. unless the density of the coating material is significantly different from the density of the process fluid. the mass balance of the tube can become affected. as long as the plugged tube remains full of process fluid and the density of the fluid in both tubes remains the same. Coatings generally will not affect the accuracy of the meter. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube. thickness. Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials. a crack will initiate at a pit. select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes. in which the flow tubes are filled with a suitable solvent that removes any coating inside the sensor flow tubes. However. the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure. Heat tracing can be employed to maintain a constant fluid temperature and prevent solidification in the meter. When this condition occurs. or the factory for questions about material suitability. which will lead to measurement errors. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. Alternatively. which has a single. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form. which affects the sensor’s response to the Coriolis forces and leads to calibration shifts. additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 221 . The DL sensor’s single flow tube can be cleaned more readily than a dual tube meter. Once a crack has begun. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking. dual-tube sensors can be particularly troublesome to unplug because one of the flow tubes will often become clear while the other tube remains plugged. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion. In the event of plugging. For additional resistance to corrosion. depending on the properties of the coating. caution must be exercised to avoid erosion of the sensor flow tubes.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F solidify. would be preferred in this case. double-loop flow tube. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material. A Model DL sensor. Buildup of coatings or tube plugging will cause the pressure drop through the meter to increase.

which depends on deflection of the tubes resulting from the Coriolis forces. changing the vibrating frequency of the tube.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy It has been determined that. This phenomenon should not impact the mass flow measurement. not on the frequency of vibration of the tubes. gasoline and propane.” showed no changes in accuracy between water. However. 222 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . for vibrating tube density meters operating at high frequencies (greater than 500 Hz). the tube vibration can cause localized changes in the fluid density at the tube wall. Specific testing for velocity of sound influences has not been conducted. Additionally. WIB report E2620 T93. Micro Motion meters operate at low tube frequency (less than 160 Hz). Model CMF300. “The ELITE Mass Flow Meter.

. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement. . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on density measurement . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Corrosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 228 228 229 232 232 233 233 235 235 236 236 225 227 228 229 230 231 232 234 236 230 233 234 237 Figure G-1 Figure G-2 Figure G-3 Figure G-4 Figure G-5a Figure G-5b Figure G-6 Figure G-7 Figure G-8 Table G-1 Table G-2 Table G-3 Table G-4 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 223 . . . . . . . . Velocity of Sound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of sound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Erosion . . .Appendix G Density Measurement G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy . Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FD and K3 values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mounting for sensor vibration isolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coating/Plugging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid Flow Rate .

224 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

which will change the natural frequency of vibration of the flow tubes.Appendix G Density Measurement G. a Coriolis meter’s mass flow rate measurement and density measurement are entirely independent of one another. By measuring the frequency of the pickoffs’ sinusoidal voltage. Pickoff coil and magnet Flow tubes Pickoff coil and magnet Drive coil and magnet Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 225 . Changes in the density of the process fluid will cause the mass of the flow tube/fluid system to change. This change in natural frequency will cause the frequency of the sinusoidal voltage from the pickoffs to change. Components of a Coriolis flow sensor. The mathematics that describe the density measurement are presented below. page 226. the density of the process fluid can be determined. The frequency of the sinusoidal voltage from the pickoffs represents the natural frequency of the tube vibration. which is described by Equation G-1. The following explanation of the density measurement mechanism is provided to clarify this concept. The sensor’s coil and magnet driver are used to oscillate the flow tubes in opposition at their natural frequency. The primary components of a typical Coriolis sensor are presented in Figure G-1. Figure G-1.1 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement As has been stated previously. The oscillation of the tubes causes the pickoff detectors to output a sinusoidal voltage signal that reflects this motion. Shown is an ELITE® CMF300 sensor. Vibrating systems — The sensor flow tube is essentially a spring/mass system.

lb (kg) Mass of the system (m) — The mass of the system is the combination of the mass of the flow tube and the mass of the process fluid. Equation G-8. G-3) MEI k = ----------3 lt Modal constant Modulus of elasticity.4lb * in)/(poundforce * s2) m = Mass of the system. (Eq. (Eq. in2 (cm2) Tube cross-sectional area.G Density Measurement Coriolis Meter Density Measurement (Eq. and is entirely independent of the mass flow rate measurement. shows that the density of the fluid is directly proportional to the period of the tube vibration squared (t2). (Eq. poundforce/in2 (kPa) Moment of inertia. cycles/second t = Tube period (number of seconds for one cycle of oscillation). (Eq. lb/in3 (g/cc) Tube internal area. °C where f = Oscillation frequency. (Eq. as shown in Equations G-6 and G-7. as described by Equation G-3. G-5) ρt A MEI 2 ρ f = ------------------- * t – ---------t 4π 2 l 4 A Af t f where ωn = Natural frequency. G-9) C T = 1 – K Tden * 0. in4 (cm4) Final equation — The final equation. G-1) ωn = k ---m Substitute and rearrange — Equation G-5 is derived by substituting Equations G-2. G-7) ρt A Cb = ---------t Af where ρf ρt Af At lt = = = = = Fluid density. It is determined as shown in Equation G-9. in2 (cm2) Tube length. second 226 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . (Eq. G-3 and G-4 into Equation G-1 and solving for ρf . (Eq.0001 * T meas where KTden = Temperature coefficient for density Tmeas = Measured flow tube temperature. in (cm) Spring constant (k) — The spring constant depends on the tube geometry and the modulus of elasticity of the tubing material. G-8) ρ f = C a * CT * t – C b 2 where CT = Correction for the effect of temperature on the modulus of elasticity where M = E = I = Natural frequency (ωn) — Equation G-4 converts the natural frequency to tube period. G-2) m = ρ f A f l t + ρ t At l t Constants — The parameters that define tube geometry and material properties are combined to provide the calculation constants Ca and Cb. G-4) 2π ω = 2πf = -----t Temperature correction coefficient (CT) — This coefficient corrects for the effect of temperature on the flow tube stiffness. pound-force/inch or lb/s2 (N/m or kg/s2) lb/s2 =(pound-force/in) * gc gc =(386. G-6) MEI C a = ------------------2 4 4π l t A f (Eq. described by Equation G-2. lb/in3 (g/cc) Tube material density. rad/s k = Spring constant.

not Ca and Cb. two simultaneous equations with two unknowns can be solved to obtain Ca and Cb. and the temperature measuring device (RTD). the drive mechanism. which triggers a time measurement over the duration of the tube cycle. which detects the start and end of each tube cycle. The electronics is comprised of interfaces to the sensor. signal processing components. air and water are used as the calibration fluids. D1 and D2. Interfaces between the sensor and the electronics include the pickoff detectors. If the tube temperature increases. The tube cycles are gated by the counter. With the two fluid densities (D1 and D2) and their respective tube periods (K1 and K2). The sinusoidal voltage signal from one of the pickoff detectors is input to a counter. A block diagram of the density measurement components in the transmitter is presented in Figure G-2. the tube will become more elastic. The time or period over which the tube cycle occurred is obtained from a precision crystal oscillator. This would result in an Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 227 . because the natural frequency of the tube vibration is affected by changes in temperature. At the factory. RFT9739 signal processing block diagram. and outputs to external devices. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass of the system has not changed. The microprocessor reads the counter time measurement and uses this value along with the tube temperature and calibration constants to calculate the fluid density. Sensor Interface Transmitter Signal processing Precision oscillator Microprocess or Frequency ρ Counter Inlet pickoff Signal amplifier Pickoff comparator Outlet pickof Signal amplifier Outputs Drive coil Drive control Q q Analog (4-20 mA) · m M RS-485/ RS-232 Flow tube temperature Temperature amplifier A/D converter T Alarm External pressure (optional) Analog or HART A/D converter P (optiona Values for the calibration constants are determined by measuring the tube period at two known fluid densities. and the respective tube periods. The density calibration values that are stored in the transmitter are the calibration fluid densities. Calibration fluids should be selected that have sufficiently different densities. K1 and K2.Density Measurement Coriolis Meter Density Measurement G Figure G-2. The tube temperature measurement is required.

Temperature effect on density measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Because a Coriolis meter operates like a vibrating spring/mass system. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass Figure G-3. mass. the net flow rate of one or more components in a multi-component mixture can also be determined.02 0 -0. is used to correct the natural frequency measurement for temperature related changes in the elastic modulus of the flow tube material. each sensor model and size will behave somewhat differently when fluid properties change.) G. the tube will become more elastic. If the tube temperature increases.04 0. Portions of the following sections are the same as presented in Appendix F. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. its density measurement will be affected by changes in tube stiffness.02 30 60 90 120 Temperature (°F) 316L Hastelloy C-22 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 228 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . (For example. Temperature and pressure are the primary factors that affect flow tube stiffness. The following measurement computations can also be performed by peripheral devices: • • • • • • Percent solids by mass or volume Degrees Brix Percent water cut Percent fructose Percent alcohol Percent solids black liquor Because flow rate is also measured by the Coriolis meter. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. peripheral devices are available that provide additional information about the process fluid. In addition to providing density. In many instances the end users of the density measurement instrumentation are interested in determining the percentage of one or more components in a mixture. page 225.08 Density error (g/cc) 0. 0.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy increase in the tube period.1. obtained from the RTD. The tube temperature. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly in Section G. Additional factors that can affect a meter’s density measurement include: • • • • Flow rate Orientation Entrained gas External vibration • Erosive properties of the fluid • Coating or plugging of the flow tubes Many of these factors affect both the mass flow rate and density measurements. the flow rate of oil in an oil-water emulsion can be determined.06 0. and damping. Due to design variations.

as shown in Equations G-8 and G-9. A pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the sensor as possible.00010 Density error (g/cc) 0.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G of the system has not changed. The signal from the pressure transducer is input to the RFT9739. divide the density error by the operating density and multiply by 100. The effect of temperature on the density measurement can be characterized.26% per 100°C change in temperature. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube.79% per 100°C change in temperature. and a subsequent increase in the density indication.00030 0 20 40 60 80 100 D600 CMF300 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density Pressure (psig) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 229 . the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. 0. geometry. resulting in a decrease in the tube period and a subsequent decrease in the indicated density. This would result in an increase in the tube period.00010 -0. A pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter.00020 -0. diameter. To obtain the error percentage. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. page 226.00000 -0. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress Figure G-4. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. However. which automatically compensates for pressure effects using Equation G-10. and the density measurement can be corrected. which increases the tube frequency. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. page 230. In bent-tube designs. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). Figure G-3 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s density measurement if no temperature compensation were used. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. However. The flow tube wall thickness. Pressure effect on density measurement — no pressure compensation. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. The influence of pressure on the CMF300 density measurement is an order of magnitude less than it is for the D600. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. Figure G-4 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4.

Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0. the CMF300.5W 230 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . has such a slight density effect that *Standard-pressure model (DS300) only.5W 250Ω ±5% 0.00000022 where ρcorrected = Corrected density ρmeasured = Uncorrected meter density indication = Pressure coefficient for density KPden (Table G-1) = Measured pressure under Pmeas flowing conditions. and some are negative.00001 0. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter..000001 –0. Automatic pressure compensation for density cannot be performed by the RFT9712 transmitter. Highpressure model (DH300) has no pressure effect. G-10) ρ corrected = ρ measured + K Pden * P meas Table G-1.5W 24 VDC RFT9739 field-mount Power supply Flow P RFT9739 rack-mount CN2 Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) Power supply 24 VDC D30 Z30 250Ω ±5% 0. psig Table G-1 lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the density measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. The values presented in Table G-1 illustrate that variations in flow tube geometry can entirely eliminate the hoop stress stiffening effect of pressure.000006 –0. Figure G-5a and Figure G-5b show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter. KPden(g/cc/psig) 0.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy (Eq. it remains well within specification over its entire rated pressure range. Pressure coefficients for density.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. Some of the correction factors are positive.000001 0. which has a modified flow tube geometry. Figure G-5a. Model D300 and DL200 sensors have the greatest pressure effect on density.0000031 0. Sensor Model D300* and DL200 D600 DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication.

The new calibration factor is determined as shown below: (Eq.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G If a HART output is used.0005 g/cc). and ±500 psi for CMF200 sensors. the wiring will be connected as illustrated in Figure G-5b. the RFT9739 provides DC power to the pressure transmitter. Flow P RFT9739 field-mount Pressure transmitter 4-20 mA terminals Flow P RFT9739 rack-mount CN2 Z6 Pressure transmitter Z20 4-20 mA terminals Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 231 . these pressure ranges result in errors within ±0.+ ( K1old ) 2 ρ corrected ρ Figure G-5b. G-11) K2 new = measured [ ( K2 old ) 2 – ( K1 old )2 ] * ---------------------. This method is only acceptable if the process pressure remains fairly constant (±50 psi for D300 sensors. as shown in Figure G-5a. ±125 psi for D600 sensors. because it is easier to wire. provides faster response time. If a 4-20 mA pressure signal input is used. The PV output will be driven to 4 mA in this case. It is important to configure both the pressure transducer and the RFT9739 with unique (non-zero) communication “addresses” to allow communication. eliminating the need for an external power supply. ±80 psi for CMF100 sensors. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input. The multidrop connection provides the pressure measurement from the pressure transducer using HART communication for polling. the pressure measurement is brought in as a multidrop connection on the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. and does not disable the RFT9739 PV output. An alternative to on-line compensation is to determine a new K2 meter calibration factor at the operating process fluid pressure. In the 4-20 mA input configuration. and cannot be used as a process variable output. Using a direct 4-20 mA input is preferable to the HART polling method described above.

if possible.000 lb/min). more accurate.000 4.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy where = Determined from Equation G-10.005 Density error (g/cc) 0. the K3 value listed in Table G-2 may be used. Therefore. there will be a shift in the meter’s density reading. For older RFT9739 transmitters. the density reading is greatest when the tubes are oriented upward. but appears to be related to variations in gravitational forces.004 0.001 0. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. The effect generally decreases with increasing sensor size.000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) 10. For flow rates less than 50% of the nominal flow rate (the CMF300 nominal flow rate is 5. The RFT9739 uses a three-point flowingdensity calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density. The density reading varies uniformly for orientations between the vertical upward and vertical downward positions — the flag position (mounted in a vertical pipeline) and the horizontal or flat position (with the Figure G-6. the effect is not linear. all earlier RFT9739 versions use a K3 value. If the RFT9739 has software version 3. therefore. and G-8. beyond this point the error increases exponentially. 0. and lowest when the tubes are oriented downward. it uses an FD compensation value.6 or later. The mechanism for this influence is not well understood. The influence of fluid flow rate is negligible at low flow rates and increases with increasing flow rate. G-7. however. Fluid Flow Rate Increasing fluid flow rate causes the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes to decrease. the flow rate effect on density is insignificant. page 230. (K1 and K2 should not be confused with the constants Ca and Cb presented in Equations G-6. Figure G-6 illustrates the effect of increasing fluid flow rate on the density measurement of a CMF300. The K3 algorithm is based on water as the flowing medium.000 0 2. rather than the FD value listed in Table G-2. This results in an increase in the tube period and a subsequent increase in the density indication. Sensors shipped after March 1998 have a unique FD value listed on the sensor serial number tag or the calibration certificate shipped with the flowmeter. The frequency of vibration of the sensor flow tubes is lower when the flow tubes are oriented upward than when they are oriented downward.003 0.002 0.000 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 232 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The magnitude of the effect of fluid flow rate varies from one sensor to the next. and is. The FD algorithm is based on the measured density of the calibration process fluid. K1 and K2 = Represent the measured tube periods determined when the meter is calibrated on air and water.000 6. ρcorrected The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. page 226. Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement — CMF300 with no compensation. It is recommended to use this FD value. however. Therefore. Sensor Orientation If the orientation of the sensor is changed. respectively.000 8.

because it is dependent on so many variables: • • • • • Sensor size and model Fluid viscosity Fluid flow rate Fluid surface tension Characteristics of gas (bubble size. Once drive saturation occurs. which requires the drive circuitry to output more energy to keep the tubes vibrating. Actually. stratified. The transmitter’s slug flow cutoff function can be used to indicate a fault condition when the presence of gas causes the density to fall out of the expected operating range.0018 0. the meter is no longer capable of making a measurement. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 233 . Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas Mixtures of gas and liquid in the sensor affect the density measurement in two ways. A small amount of gas in the liquid can dramatically impact the overall fluid density. The transmitter will automatically indicate an error condition when the drive becomes saturated. well mixed. the amount of current that can be supplied to vibrate the tubes is limited.0005 g/cc. sensors are often installed where they are exposed to external vibrations. creating more of an emulsion. This is called drive saturation. The drive gain should normally be between 3 and 4 volts DC. Testing to fully characterize this influence on all sensor sizes and orientations is still in progress. the measurement accuracy of the meter will begin to degrade. A point can be reached where the tubes will no longer vibrate at the design amplitude. fluids with higher surface tension will tend to create a more uniform dispersion of any entrained gas in the fluid. If the measurement of liquid density is critical. Once this occurs. Significant measurement Vibration Because Coriolis sensors operate by vibrating. the combination of gas and liquid dampens out the vibration of the sensor flow tubes. even though the maximum power is being applied to the driver. A sensor’s sensitivity to entrained gas is difficult to determine. FD and K3 values.00038 0. CMF300 or D600 sensor from a tubes-down to a tubes-up orientation would result in an increase in the indicated density of approximately 0. severe drive saturation has occurred. The combination of gas and liquid will result in a density that is lower than the density of the liquid. In general. because gas occupies a large volume relative to its mass. etc. The meter drive gain reading can be used for determining whether drive saturation is occurring. Changing the orientation of a CMF200. the sensor flow tube will stop vibrating at 5 to 15 percent gas by volume. Sensor model D300 D600 DL100 DL200 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 FD 200 50 670 150 230 320 280 K3 0. Additionally. If it exceeds 13 volts DC. Due to intrinsic safety limitations. yet they provide excellent performance. The sensor will perform better in these types of applications than in those where the gas easily breaks out and accumulates. Based on tests performed with air and water. the tube vibration will drop below a measurable level. At some point. a common misconception is that they will not function properly in an environment that is subject to vibration. The impact of changing sensor orientation decreases with increasing sensor size.) • Fluid pressure Larger sensors have a lower tolerance for entrained gas than smaller sensors. all efforts should be made to remove gas from the liquid.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G Table G-2.0317 0.00018 errors will occur as the tube amplitude decreases. sensor flow tubes parallel to the ground) will provide density measurements approximately halfway between the tubes-up and tubes-down density measurements.000015 not applicable not applicable 0.

Structural mounting supports Vibration isolation with flex hose or elastomeric coupling Load-bearing vibration isolators (such as Lord sandwich mounts) Sensors are designed to withstand vibrational amplitudes associated with good pipeline practices.998 g/cc 106 73 73 39 234 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which in some cases can lead to measurement errors. In severely vibrating pipelines. Vibration cannot transfer to sensor. known as cross-talk. However. Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) ρ = 0. Table G-3. as illustrated in Figure G-7. in the event that the pipeline frequency affects the operation of the meter. Another vibration-related problem is encountered when multiple sensors are installed in the same pipeline. the sensor should be isolated from the vibration with flexible piping and vibration isolating pipe supports. as a unit.8 g/cc 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 ρ = 0. Sensors of the same size and model operate at very similar frequencies. The sensors can transmit enough vibrational energy through the pipeline to excite one another. The susceptibility of the meter to vibration will vary from one design to another. page 234. Typical sensor operating frequencies. it is advisable to install adequate vibration isolation for a Coriolis sensor in an environment where piping and other process equipment have experienced vibration-related failures. but has been minimized with the ELITE sensors. This problem. It is uncommon to find a pipeline that transmits enough vibrational energy at the operating frequency of the sensor to affect the performance of the meter. it might be possible to apply rigid clamps to the piping to change the frequency being transmitted down the pipeline. Sensor. However. from the pipeline and the ground. Measurement errors will occur if the sensor is subjected to external vibrations at or near the vibration frequency of the oscillating tubes or one of the harmonics of this frequency. and connected piping are isolated. sensor connections. Table G-3 presents typical operating frequencies for ELITE and Model D600 sensors. Mounting for sensor vibration isolation.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Figure G-7. is fairly common with Model D sensors.0012 g/cc ρ = 0.

If the product that solidifies and coats the tubes is more dense than the process fluid. a 10% reduction in thickness) on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. This condition usually results when the sensor flow tube diameter is much smaller than the diameter of the process piping. The DL sensor’s single tube can be cleaned more readily than a dual tube meter. A system to monitor pressure drop through the meter can be used to establish cleaning requirements. Contact the factory and request information on Custom Engineering Quotation (CEQ) 7146300 for additional details to determine if this approach is suitable for your application. can be used to isolate the sensor from the piping. Heat tracing can be employed to maintain a constant fluid temperature and prevent solidification in the meter. there have been cases where both modes have required isolation. Flexible hose.108 inches.12 to 0. and tube stiffness. precautions should be taken to vibrationally isolate the sensors from one another. the flow rate through the system will be significantly diminished due to the reduced flow path through the sensor. in smaller diameter flow tubes. Density measurement errors associated with plugging and coating are difficult to predict. Coating/Plugging Some process fluids have a tendency to coat the flow tubes or harden inside the flow tubes. double-loop flow tube would be preferred in this case. tube mass. In the event of plugging. while a reduction in stiffness causes the density indication to increase. can be used to isolate the sensor from any transmission through the pipe mounts. Although these two effects offset one another to some extent. Generally. the fluid will be exposed to a greater surface area. become clear while the other tube remains plugged. Therefore. For a process fluid that has a tendency to solidify. the sensor flow tubes will actually become plugged. resulting in a net increase in the indicated density. An alternative approach is to obtain sensors which have sufficiently different natural frequencies that minimize cross-talk. illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness (from 0. However. which has a single. The objective of applying vibration isolation is to attenuate the transmission frequency. which assists heat loss and product solidification. depending on the properties of the coating. However. As stated previously. It is important to properly apply the vibration isolating components to accomplish this task. A Model DL sensor. Figure G-8. Buildup of coatings or tube plugging will cause the pressure drop through the meter to increase. the density indication will increase as product deposits on the tubes. the stiffness component predominates. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 235 .Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G In order to prevent cross-talk from occurring. When this condition occurs. a routine cleaning procedure can be followed. this is generally only required for Model D sensors. Erosion reduces the flow tube wall thickness. preventing the tubes from vibrating in a normal fashion. the tube vibration may be dampened. Alternatively. Also. dual-tube sensors can be particularly troublesome to unplug because one of the flow tubes will often Erosion Coriolis meters can be used to measure solid/liquid mixtures that contain extremely abrasive solids. This can also lead to measurement errors. preventing flow through the sensor. caution must be exercised to avoid erosion of the sensor flow tubes. a sensor should be selected that has a flow tube inner diameter that is as close as possible to the inner diameter of the process piping. or an elastomeric bellows like those used for thermal expansion joints. Figure G-7 illustrates how to provide vibration isolation. A reduction in tube mass causes the density indication to decrease. page 236. in which the flow tubes are filled with a suitable solvent that removes any coating inside the sensor flow tubes. The ratio of tube surface area to fluid volume increases as the tube diameter decreases. In some instances. only one mode of transmission needs to be isolated: either piping or mounting. Load-bearing mounts such as Lord Industrial Products sandwich mounts.

which will cause a localized increase in the fluid density. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials. which results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube.06 0.04 0. Once a crack has begun. Corrosion Figure G-8. Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application.08 Initial wall thickness 0. In this type of corrosion. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions.112 0. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking.116 0. stresses. However.02 0.114 0.110 0. the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure. Figure G-8. also illustrates the effect of material loss due to corrosion.118 0. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form. which illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement — ELITE® CMF300 sensor. your sales representative or the factory for questions about material suitability.10 0.120 Density error (g/cc) g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 0. a crack will initiate at a pit. there will be localized compression of the fluid at the tube wall.108 Wall thickness (in) 236 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes. ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22. For additional resistance to corrosion. However. If the velocity of the flow tube wall approaches the velocity of sound in the process fluid. the impact of corrosion on a Coriolis meter is complicated by the vibration of the flow tubes. 0. The effect of these compressive and decompressive forces depends on the interaction of the vibrating flow tube and the velocity at which sound travels through the fluid.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion. In an environment where there were no alternating stresses or very low Velocity of Sound Velocity of sound influences are related to the localized compression and decompression of fluid at the surface of the flow tube as the tube vibrates back and forth.00 0. Also. additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube.

is provided below. This phenomenon should not impact Micro Motion meters.06 in = ---------------------------------0. G-12) c = 223 * γ*T -------------MW where c γ T MW = = = = Velocity of sound Ratio of specific heats Fluid temperature (°R) Molecular weight Table G-4 lists the velocity of sound for some hydrocarbon products. which approximates the flow tube velocity for a Micro Motion meter. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 237 . The velocity of the Coriolis meter flow tube is approximately 350 times less than the velocity of sound of pentane. page 234).06 inches (the tube will move from peak to peak in onehalf tube cycle) Tube frequency = 160 Hz (equal to approximately 0.6 ft/sec The velocity of sound for gases can be determined from Equation G-12. Hydrocarbon product Pentane n-Butane CO2 Propane Velocity of sound* (ft/sec) 598 676 842 857 *Velocity when product temperature is 30°F.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G The velocity of sound influence is a problem for density meters that have a high flow tube velocity — those with a high operating frequency or large tube displacements. Therefore. (Eq. and have low tube displacements (less than 0. which operate at low frequencies (less than 160 Hz — see Table G-3. The velocity of sound in liquids is significantly higher than in gases. because the vibrating frequency is generally much lower than 160 Hz. (This calculation is quite conservative.003125 seconds per one-half tube cycle) Total Displacement Tube Velocity = --------------------------------------------------------1 -.) Total displacement = 0.2 in/sec = 1. it is very unlikely that velocity of sound influences would create a density measurement error for Micro Motion Coriolis meters. A simplified calculation.003125 sec = 19.03-inch peak displacement). 0. Velocity of sound.( Tube Period ) 2 0. Table G-4.00625 seconds per tube cycle.

238 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement . . . . . . . . . . Zero Influences. . . . . . . . . . . . .1 H. . . . . Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement. . . . . 241 241 241 243 243 243 Figure H-1 Figure H-2 Figure H-3 242 242 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 239 . . . . . .Appendix H Volume Measurement H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid Flow Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement. . . . . . . .

240 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

for density. density. H. and flow rate on the volume measurement. such as: entrained gas. coating. page 228.Appendix H Volume Measurement H. In order to understand how the mass flow measurements are made. the effect of temperature on density is of larger magnitude than the effect on mass flow rate. refer to Appendix F. page 211. volumetric flow can be determined. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. an increase in temperature results in a decreased volume indication. sensor orientation. and G-3.000. A brief discussion of zero influences is also included. as shown in Equation H-1. and G. corrosion. it can be seen that any influence that results in an increase in the indicated mass flow rate will cause a subsequent increase in the indicated volume. for details concerning other effects. the calculated volume will be affected by all of the parameters that affect the mass and density measurements (described in detail in Appendices F. The RTD mounted on every sensor’s flow tube provides continuous compensation for the effect of temperature on the mass flow rate and density Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 241 . page 205. vibration.1 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement Since Coriolis meters provide independent mass flow and density measurements. Thus.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Because the volumetric flow rate is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. pressure. page 223. However. page 205. it can be seen that an increase in temperature causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to increase. page 223). H-1) · m q = ---ρ where = Calculated volume Mass flow measurement ρ = Density measurement q · m = The volume calculation is performed continuously by the transmitter. page 223. (Eq. and any influence that results in an increase in the indicated density will cause a decrease in the indicated volume. erosion. The following sections illustrate the impact of temperature. Temperature Figure H-1 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement for stainless steel and Hastelloy sensors with no temperature compensation. Referring back to Figures F-4. see Appendix G. flow profile. and velocity of sound. Refer to Appendices F. From Equation H-1. and G. viscosity. The influences described below explain how the combination of mass and density influences affect the volume measurement. page 205.

Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement — CMF300 no compensation. 0.3 -0. 2.0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Temperature (°F) Figure H-2.1 -0.5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.000 Figure H-3.1 -0.3 -0.4 -0.0 -4.0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0. Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation.1 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0 -0.4 0 20 40 60 Pressure (psig) 80 100 D600 CMF300 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.2 -0.000 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .2 -0.0 316L Hastelloy C-22 -2. Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation. 0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) -0. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters.2 0.0 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.H Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Figure H-1.000 -6.

Referring back to Figures F-5. However. Fluid Flow Rate Figure H-3 illustrates the effect of fluid flow rate on the meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement for a CMF300 sensor. page 212. Conversely. page 214. it can be seen that an increase in pressure causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to decrease. Referring back to Figure G-6. Refer to Meter Zero Influences. volume. page 195. starting on page 214. resulting in a subsequent decrease in the volumetric flow rate measurement. Refer to Section G. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. Zero Influences Changes in the meter zero will affect the meter’s mass flow rate measurement. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. an increase in pressure results in a decreased volume indication. with no pressure compensation. as described on page 212 for mass flow measurement. Thus.. Thus. page 228. it can be seen that an increase in flow rate causes the density indication to increase. the effect of pressure on density is much smaller than the effect on mass flow rate. as described in detail in Appendix F. Zeroing requirements are discussed in Appendix E. The RFT9739 uses a threepoint flowing-density calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density and. for additional information about zero influences on mass flow measurement. A positive zero offset will cause an increase in the mass flow rate measurement.000.2. calibrated at 20 psig. page 229. subsequently. and on page 229 for density measurement. page 232. The impact of pressure can be compensated for. an increase in flow rate results in a decreased volume indication.Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy H Pressure Figure H-2 illustrates the effect of pressure on the volumetric flow measurement for D600 and CMF300 sensors. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 243 .000. for additional information about compensating for this effect. resulting in a subsequent increase in the volumetric flow rate measurement. a negative zero offset will cause a decrease in the mass flow rate measurement. and G-4.

244 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 248 247 248 Figure I-1 Table I-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 245 . . . .Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I. . Derivation of Equation I-1 . . . . . .1 I. .2 Method for Determining Required Number of Passes . . . Number of passes per run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate. . . . . . . . . . . . .

246 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

004 1. A general recommendation for the required number of passes for a Coriolis meter cannot be made because it depends on the size of the prover and the fluid flow rate.8 0.002 1. This analysis determined the number of passes per run that provided repeatability of less than 0.996 0.6 0. page 102.Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I.006 1.8 1. In order to use Equation I-1 the meter factors for an initial group of proving passes must be determined.0 25000 Meter factor 1. Thirty prover passes are recommended for this initial group.010 1. for each flow rate.4 1.012 1.008 1. These data illustrate the repeatability results becoming significantly poorer at higher flow rates. are shown in Figure I-1.1 Method for Determining Required Number of Passes Equation I-1 was developed to assist in determining the required number of proving passes per proving run: (Eq.2 0. Figure I-1. along with the pass-to-pass repeatability.6 1.05%.994 0. The following is an example of how Equation I-1 can be applied. The results of these two analysis methods are presented in Table I-1. page 248.992 0. I-1) 1000 * ( MF max – MF min ) Passes per Run = -----------------------------------------------------------------MF avg * MF stdev 2 The derivation of this equation is presented in Section I. The meter factors for the individual proving passes.4 0.998 0.000 0. Figure I-1 shows proving data from a D600 sensor proved with a 24-inch Compact Prover. Equation I-1 was then applied to the first 30 proving passes at each flow rate shown in Figure I-1. at a variety of flow rates.2 1.0 0. 1.2. The D600 data was analyzed using the pass grouping method illustrated by Figure 8-9. Shown are typical results for a Model D600 sensor and an RFT9739 transmitter with a 24-inch Compact™ Prover. Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate.990 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Repeatability (%) Meter factors Repeatability Flow rate (lb/min) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 247 .

3 2. where the prover is undersized and adequate repeatability cannot be obtained.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 Table I-1.605 1. At the highest flow rate of 24. the prerun time was only 0.031 12 10 0. At this flow rate.239 0.3. The values in Equation I-2 are obtained by performing a series of proving passes.139 0. Twenty passes is typically considered to be the practical limit for the number of passes per group. then dividing by the number of passes. It was determined that the meter and prover were incompatible at this flow rate.126 0. then proving the Coriolis meter against the transfer standard meter. (Eq.019 3 15 0. In instances such as the one described above.044 5 5 0.2 3. Because there are no volume limitations with master meter proving. repeatability is used as the criteria for defining how many proving passes per run are required. I.6 1.080 0.667 The predictions of Equation I-1. Typical results using a Model D600 sensor and RFT9739 transmitter. This involves proving the transfer standard meter against the prover.038 12 15 0. PulsesMAX = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the greatest number of pulses.67 seconds. page 104. R 248 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .326 0. Number of passes per run. Issues related to using transfer standard meters and volumetric master meters are discussed in Section 8. page 247. Therefore.031 17 >20 n/a 51 Flow rate (lb/min) 1164 1164 1971 2417 6207 9710 13836 16425 19867 24299 Pass time (sec) 28 28 16. PulsesMIN = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the fewest number of pulses.05% could not be obtained within 20 prover passes.0 1.067 0. Repeatability criteria ≤ 0. it was predicted that 51 proving passes would be required. the proving duration can be set to any desired length of time.3 Pass-to-pass repeatability (%) 0. The actual test data showed that repeatability of less than 0.049 4 5 0. I-2) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN R(%) = -----------------------------------------------------------.153 0. Details of transfer standard proving procedures are presented in Section 3.040 4 3 0. proved with a 24” Compact™ Prover (Results from Figure I-1.45 seconds — below the recommended minimum of 0.3 2.4 13.05% Passes per run Repeatability from grouped from Passes per run data grouped data from Equation I-1 5 0.117 0.867 lb/min and less.5.042 6 3 0. for flow rates of 19.039 5 10 0. transfer standard proving may be required. page 30.4 5.2 Derivation of Equation I-1 The measure of whether a proving is acceptable or not is the proving repeatability.299 lb/min. page 247). correlate very well with the pass grouping method. PulsesAVG = The average number of pulses per proving pass is obtained by summing the pulses accumulated from all of the proving passes. Proving repeatability for volumetric flowmeters is generally calculated as shown in Equation I-2.* 100 Pulses AVG where = Repeatability is given as a percentage (not a decimal) value.

It was desired to use an additional multiplier to provide some statistical significance to the prediction. I-3) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Pulses required = -----------------------------------------------------------. PulsesMAX • µ is replaced by the sample average.* 100 R After calculating the required number of pulses per run. Pulsesstdev. It was decided to weight Equation I-5 by multiplying by the z statistic. as shown in Equation I-3. the number of pulses per proving pass is fixed by the size of the prover and the meter’s K-factor. as shown in Equation I-6. which essentially increases the volume basis for the proving. (Eq. I-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Passes = -----------------------------------------------------------. However. (Eq.* 100 R * Pulses AVG The z statistic is applicable to a normally distributed population. I-6) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Passes = z * -----------------------------------------------------------.Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 I The reason for determining the number of passes per run is that a certain number of pulses per proving run are required in order to produce acceptable repeatability between proving runs. I-4) Pulses required Passes = ----------------------------------Pulses AVG Equation I-5 is derived by substituting Equation I-3 into Equation I-4.* 100 R * Pulses AVG Equation I-5 is overly simplistic and underpredicts the number of passes required. (Eq. Using Equation I-2. PulsesAVG • σ is replaced by the sample standard deviation. The z statistic definition was modified by substituting specific values related to flowmeter proving. more proving passes per run must be made. because it does not account for the statistical variation in the data. the number of pulses required to achieve a given repeatability can be predicted. as described below and shown in Equation I-7: • x is replaced by the most deviant point of the sample. the required number of passes per run is determined using Equation I-4. The z statistic is defined by the following equation: x–µ z = ----------σ where x µ σ = = = Any observation in the population The mean of the population The population standard deviation (Eq. To generate more pulses. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 249 .

05% was substituted into Equation I-11 to provide Equation I-12. which results in Equation I-11. the meter factor (MF) is substituted in Equation I-10 for the number of pulses. because density variations are not accounted for. at least 30 proving passes must be performed. I-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN z = -----------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG The formula for the z statistic is then substituted into Equation I-6. the following relationship should be true: (Eq. which results in Equation I-10. Therefore. These values are entered into Equation I-12 and the required number of passes per run is determined. I-12) 1000 * ( MFMAX – MFMIN ) Passes = ------------------------------------------------------------------MFAVG * MFstdev 2 To use Equation I-12. I-11) 50 * ( MF MAX – MF MIN ) Passes = -------------------------------------------------------------MF AVG * MF stdev * R 2 A repeatability of R = 0. maximum and minimum are determined from the meter factors for the 30 passes. 250 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 (Eq. standard deviation. (Eq. I-8) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Pulses MAX – Pulses AVG = -----------------------------------------------------------2 Substituting Equation I-8 into Equation I-7 gives the following result: (Eq. (Eq. I-7) Pulses MAX – Pulses AVG z = ------------------------------------------------------------Pulses stdev For a uniformly distributed population. The average. (Eq. the number of pulses cannot be used. I-10) ( Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN ) * 100 Passes = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG * Pulses stdev * R 2 For a meter that measures mass.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vibration Isolation Products . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Calibration Services. . . . . Conventional Pipe Provers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature Transmitters. . . . . Structural Pipe Clamps . . . . . . . . . Proving Services . . . . . . . Pycnometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Pulse Counters . . . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix J Proving Equipment Manufacturers Small Volume Provers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure Transmitters . . . . . 253 253 253 253 253 253 254 254 254 254 254 254 254 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 251 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Averager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

252 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

Small Volume Provers Calibron Systems Inc. Minnesota 800-903-3728 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 253 . The purpose of this appendix is to provide general information for locating equipment and service providers. This is not a complete listing of all companies that provide proving equipment and services. are listed in this appendix. Texas 915-694-9644 Meter Check Inc. Oklahoma 918-445-1141 Proving Computers Calibron Systems Inc. Tulsa. Texas 713-240-6161 Conventional Pipe Provers En-Fab Inc. Texas 281-240-0701 Winco Metric PMI Corp. Houston. Texas 713-240-6161 Spectra Tek UK Ltd. Moore. Houston. Texas 713-667-5067 Linco Electromatic Inc. Tulsa. England (01653) 600542 Proving Pulse Counters Control Instruments Inc. Midland. Scottsdale. Swinton Grange. Texas 281-240-0701 Omni Flow Computers Stafford. Eden Prairie. Texas 281-565-1118 Omni Flow Computers Stafford. Oklahoma 918-445-1141 Flow Computers DFM Stafford. Texas 915-694-9644 Pressure Transmitters Rosemount Inc. Oklahoma 918-446-1611 Winco Metric PMI Corp. Midland.Appendix J Proving Equipment Manufacturers Companies that manufacture proving-related equipment. Arizona 602-991-3550 Fisher-Rosemount Petroleum Houston. Arizona 602-991-3550 Fisher-Rosemount Petroleum Houston. and provide proving services. Malton North Yorkshire. other suppliers are generally available. This appendix does not provide endorsement or recommendation by Micro Motion Inc. of any of the suppliers listed herein. Scottsdale. Texas 713-225-4913 Linco Electromatic Inc. Oklahoma 405-790-0778 Sulton Company Tulsa.

Moore. New Jersey 201-444-7800 Proving Services Coastal Flow Measurement Houston.J Proving Equipment Manufacturers Temperature Transmitters Rosemount Inc. Sand Springs. Riverside. NJ 973-838-1780 Lord Mechanical Products Erie. Oklahoma 918-245-4129 Vibration Isolation Products Korfund Dynamics Bloomingdale. Texas 281-427-7284 Meter Check Inc. Houston. Texas 281-479-1848 Structural Pipe Clamps Stauff Corporation Waldwick. Louisiana 318-478-7736 Mass Flow Technology Baytown. Texas 281-282-0622 Liquid Meter Calibration Inc. Available as a special modification of the Linco Electromatic temperature averager. Oklahoma 918-446-1611 Pycnometers Arcco Instrument Company Inc. Texas 915-561-5812 Southern Petroleum Laboratories – SPL Carencro. Oklahoma 405-790-0778 Meter Proving Service Midland. Texas 713-686-5783 Density Averager Linco Electromatic Inc. Texas 713-660-0901 Sulton Company Tulsa. Pennsylvania 814-868-5424 254 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Eden Prairie.) Prover Calibration Services SGS Redwood Deerpark. Texas 915-694-9644 (Not a standard product. Midland. Minnesota 800-903-3728 Louisiana Meter Service Lake Charles. Louisiana 318-896-3055 Houston. California 909-788-2823 Measurement Products Inc.

Meter factor. A Accuracy. 130 meter factor uncertainty 126 proving concepts 9 proving devices 71 density 65 gravimetric tank scale accuracy 75 master meters 104 temperature 63 transfer standard master meter 30 uncertainty Coriolis master meter 115 gravimetric tank 74 transfer standard 108 volumetric tank 80 troubleshooting density factor offset 160 flow rate 136. 109 volumetric tank prover 81. Modbus protocol Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 255 . See HART Communicator. ProLink software program. 161 meter factor 136 meter recommendations 133 volume flow rate accuracy 243 Communications. Installation. proving accuracy. 88 small volume prover 96. 97 transfer standard meter 108. 210 temperature coefficient 210 calibration factor xxi output signals 45 digital communications 46 proving calculations inventory 128. 82 volume measurement 18 B BPV xxiii conventional provers 20 pipe prover 86 small volume provers proving calculations 20 proving devices 94 volume meter factor 121 volumetric tank proving 80 C Calibration xxii density 141. proving accuracy API correction factors mass 29 volume 22 density measurement 141 insulation requirements 153 mass meter factor 142 parallel installation 150 pycnometer 148 meter installation proving connections 42 proving calculations mass meter factor 122 repeatability 123 proving devices pipe prover size 90 small volume prover 101 uncertainty Coriolis master meter 116 pipe prover 87. 227 accuracy influences flow rate 232 pressure 231 temperature 229 calibration factors 158. HART protocol.Index Page numbers in bold indicate illustrations. 129. 160 digital communications 143 field proving 159 output trim 146 proving procedure 154 flow direction 202 mass flow accuracy influences pressure 213 temperature 217 viscosity 220 zero stability 215 calibration constant 209. See also Damping factor. Response time. 161 flow tube coating 137.

123 field proving 147 flow tube changes 161 inventory calculations 128 laboratory analysis 147 mass measurement 22. 126 computing proving computer feature 62 density measurement 64. 20 turbine meter 32 volume meter factor 121 Custody transfer analog output 48 density 74 meter proving 9 meter selection 35 proving 5 RFT9739 46 volumetric tank proving 78 Custody transfer measurement 4. 182 time units 52 volume measurement 18 Coriolis sensor 208 components 225 corrosion 221. 104 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 84 repeatability 103 response time output signals 53 pipe prover 89 small volume prover 99 troubleshooting 136 troubleshooting 135. 122 meter recommendations 133 time between provings 12 D Damping factor 134 number of proving runs 103 prover size 100 proving accuracy 55 recommendations conventional pipe prover 90. 187 proving 172. 158 density measurement device 64 density proving calculation 155 determining mass meter factor 122. 32 prover steel 26 proving calculations density 26. 182 meter factor calculation 73 uncertainty 74. 229 meter factor calculation 20. 18. 24 volume measurement 17 temperature and pressure measurements 29 thermal expansion 18. 91 Coriolis master meters 118 gravimetric tank proving 78 small volume prover 103. 11. 122 steel pipe prover 87 small volume prover 96 uncertainty 126 volumetric tank proving 81 temperature meter factor calculation 22. 159 zero reading 198 Density averager manufacturers 254 proving procedures density meter 25 transfer standard 31 volume 29 troubleshooting 135 Density factor xxiii.Index Conversion factor density 156. 29 mass flow 24. 32 meter factor calculation 142 offset 160 proving calculations 29 proving density device 65 proving procedure 154 Coriolis meter density 28 density meter 26 volume 30 256 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 230 buoyancy 172. 236 crosstalk 135 orientation 41 pipe stresses 39 vibration 233 Correction factor 147. 22 proving computer features 62 volume measurement 17. 141 calculating 156 correcting density reading 146. 122 density proving 148 liquid meter factor calculation conventional pipe prover 86 Coriolis master meters 114 small volume prover 95 volumetric master meters 107 volumetric tank proving 80 uncertainty conventional pipe proving 88 Coriolis master meter 116 meter factor 126 small volume prover 97 volumetric meter 109 volumetric tank proving 82 mass meter 159 mass meter factor 94 meter 9 pressure 212.

203 operating expected 107 maximum xxi. 53 nominal 202 normal 11 procedures 105 prover size recommendations 90 required number of runs 123 pressure effect on mass 212 proving 5. 10 rezeroing 200–201 sensor installation 133 tank proving ramp-up/ramp-down 76 temperature effect 217 troubleshooting 136 Index E Electronic transmitter 3 ELITE sensor Coriolis sensors 4 corrosion 221 crosstalk 134 custody transfer 35 density measurement 142. 237 Density sampling container 26 installation 153 line 147. 35 damping 54 mass measurement 22 meter factor calculation 113 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 257 . 150. 161 in-line 22 mass measurement 25–27. 4 density measurement 225 digital information 46 frequency output 49 inventory calculations 129 mass flow measurement 207–212 meter density accuracy 228 meter zero 56 meter zero influences 214 pressure effect 243 volume measurement 17 volumetric flow rate 45 volumetric flow rate accuracy 241 zero uncertainty 215 zeroing 197–199. 213 repeatability specification 125 F Flow detectors. 159 reproducibility 158 response time 53 small volume prover 93 troubleshooting 136 Flow rate effect on density 232 effect on volume 242 fluid Coriolis master meter 118 density factor offset 161 effects of damping 55 entrained gas 218. 233 maximum volume proving 24 meter density accuracy 232 minimizing external influences 42 minimum volume proving 20 reproducibility 136 required number of passes 247 small volume prover 92 volumetric flow rate accuracy 243 volumetric master meter 111 mass analog output 48 Coriolis meters 3. See Pickoff detectors Flow measurement analog output 48 custody transfer 9.1 Density meter 4 API standard 153 calibration 65 density measurement device 64 field proving 146. 225 density measurement device 65 density measurement recommendations 159 mass flow measurement 207 meter density accuracy 229–236 meter recommendations 133 operating frequencies 219 pressure effect 243 pressure influences 212. 17 recommendations 133. 152 loop 153 density proving installations 149 density proving procedure 154 inlet valve 152 parallel density installation 150 proving procedure 28 method 125 system 22 tubing 153 meter outputs 46 operating pressure 160 pressure effect 243 proving 10. 147 fluid flow rate 136. 32 mass meter factor 122 meter proving 141 proving calculations 29 proving computer feature 61 proving equipment 31 recommendation 142 series density installation 149 velocity of sound 222.

149 density sampling 153 parallel density proving 150 pay and check meters 14 proving in new installation 11 sensor 133 sensor mounting 39 slipstream 136 small volume prover 91 vertical pipeline 40 zero uncertainty 214 ISO 9000 quality audit 10 time between provings 12 ISO 9000 verification 111. 116 Coriolis meter configuration 113. 113. See also HART protocol. 114 pulse scaling factor determination 52 H HART Communicator . 3 coating 228. 230. 237 vibration 218. 17. 121. 235 corrosion 221. 144 M mA outputs. 114 density measurement device 64 meter configuration 22–32 volumetric master meters 106–108 meter configured for mass 124 meter proving 141 proving recommendations 134 repeatability 135 Measurement density 3 analog output 48 conventional pipe prover uncertainty 88 Coriolis master meter uncertainty 114– 116 Coriolis master meters 113 correction 158 custody transfer 35 digital output 46 258 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . See Outputs Mass measurement 4. 229. 144 RS-485 47. 133 meter factor reproducibility 136 meter zero influences 216 I Installation accuracy 217 Coriolis master meter 112 custody transfer 35 density measurement devices 141 density proving 148. 241 transfer standard 30 troubleshooting 135–137 velocity of sound 236. ProLink software program analog density 145 analog output 48 analog output trim 145 Bell 202 48 density measurement 65.Index variation 56 zero offset error 199 zeroing influences 215 Flow tube xxi. 236 density 45. 45 field adjustment procedure 53 frequency totalizers 62 meter mass 123 meter volume measurement 121 modifying 129 number of passes per run 249 prover size 90 proving calculations 29 proving procedure 30 pulse output 107. 134 K K-factor xxi. 123 Full-scale flow xxi density factor offset 161 maximum 56. 143 digital output 46 frequency/pulse output 53 K-factor 52 low-flow cutoff 56 meter information 57 meter zeroing 197 proving summary 134 troubleshooting 159 volume measurement 29 HART protocol communication configuration 143 mA outputs 213. 228. 233 zero offset 216 Frequency totalizing device 62. 231 multidrop network Bell 202 48. 220 density measurement 225 erosion 235 fluid flow rate 232 mass flow accuracy 211 mass flow measurement 207–210 meter sampling 99 orientation 40 pressure 228. 230 process fluids 220 sensor mounting 39 system mass 226 temperature 226.

71 volumetric proving 18 volumetric proving requirements 20 volumetric tank proving 79 Meter factor xxi accuracy Coriolis master meter 111. 122–123. 127 troubleshooting 135 uncertainty 125 volume xxiii conventional pipe prover 86 Coriolis master meter 114 density measurement 31 mass measurement 30 small volume prover 95 volumetric master meters 107 zeroing 202 Meter inventory 40. 142 Coriolis master meter 113 mass measurement 30 meter proving 141 volumetric master meters 107 number of proving passes predicting 247–250 small volume prover 102–103 pressure measurement 63 process conditions 12 prover prerun 89 proving frequency 11 registers 158 repeatability 123. 247 flow tube changes 137. 82 density measurement 225–237 density proving 141–148 inventory 129 analog output 48 custody transfer 35 density proving installations 150 frequency output 49 output recommendations 46 transfer standard proving 30 transmitter outputs and configuration 134 mass 79. 122 prover volume 4. 129 Meter zeroing xxii Coriolis master meter 202 density measurement 27 influences 214 installation recommendations 40 mass flow measurement 209 maximum volume proving 21 meter proving 11 minimum mass proving 25 output signals 56 proving 201 proving concepts 11 Index Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 259 . 28 recommendations 159 reproducibility 158 required equipment 79 RFT9739 transmitter 133 small volume prover uncertainty 97 small volume provers 94 volume measurement 29. 161 inventory calculations 129 mass measurement 22. 123 measurement devices 64 meter proving 10 pressure 136. 110 volumetric tank proving 79 calibration 137 damping pipe prover 91 proving accuracy 55 small volume prover 104 troubleshooting 136 density measurement 65 error 30 flow rate 56. 45 volumetric master meter uncertainty 109 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 81. 243 proving devices 65 proving equipment 25.1 flow rate measurement 241 fluid flow rate 136. 124 number of proving runs 90. 136 rezeroing 200 temperature measurement 63 time between provings 12 transfer standard meter 104 trend chart 12. 72 volumetric flow rate 4. 151 proving instruments 61 proving procedure 26. 27. 101 volume measurement 32 reproducibility 126. 161 inventory calculations 128–130 mass xxiii. 71. 108 calculations conventional pipe prover 85 Coriolis master meter 113 density measurement 26 gravimetric tank proving 73 laboratory analysis 147 maximum volume proving 22 meter proving 10 minimum mass proving 24 minimum volume proving 20 small volume prover 94 transfer standard proving 29 volumetric master meters 107. 27. 32 mass meter factor 122. 100 prover prerun 99 tank volume 83 average 102. 112 erosion 90. 85–87.

231 meter 35. 46. 208 calibration constant 210 external influences 42 flow calibration 129 mass flow accuracy 211 response time 53 signals xxii calibration constant 210 flow calibration factor 45 260 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 117 accuracy 89. 49 low-flow cutoff 56 recommendations 46 troubleshooting 53 HART 230. 218 pulse 30. 53 Coriolis meters 3 density measurement 225. 208 prover plenum pressure 99 response time 53 zero offset influences 216 sensors xxii. 227 low-flow cutoff 56 mass flow measurement 207. 234 plugging 221 pressure effect density measurement 229–231 mass flow accuracy 212 volume measurement 243 proving passes 102 recommendations 133. 113 inventory calculations 129 measuring in mass units 29 meter factor calculation Coriolis master meter 113 pipe proving 85 small volume prover 94. 159 sensor orientation impact 233 vibration isolation 235 N NIST density proving 151. 152 pipe prover 84 pipe prover uncertainty 86 proving versus calibration 9 small volume prover 92 small volume prover uncertainty 95. 48 Bell 202 48 density measurement devices 65 density proving 144 interfacing with 49 output trim 145 Bell 202 47 density proving 144 mass flow accuracy 212 density xxii. 117 RS-485 47. 28 digital 46 frequency 51. 143 multidrop network RS-485 144 Model D sensor 210 accuracy 215 custody transfer 35 density accuracy 65 flow rate effect 232 number of proving passes 247. 106–108 volumetric tank proving 83 Output 45–57 analog 45. 96 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 80 O Operating conditions xxii. 248 operating frequencies 219. 95 volumetric master meters and transfer standards 107 volumetric tank proving 79 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 20 proving systems 45 pulse measuring in mass units 29 repeatable 110. 89 accumulating pulses 110. 143 density measurement 26. 98 K-factor 129 prover prerun 99 pulse scaling factor determination 52 repeatability gravimetric tank proving 77 pipe prover 90 small volume prover 103 volumetric tank proving 83 response time 54 frequency/pulse 45. 142.Index reproducibility 136 trend charts 12 Modbus protocol communication configuration 47. 30 Coriolis master meter process fluid conditions 117 proving devices 111 Coriolis master meter uncertainty 114 custody transfer 10 gravimetric tank proving 76 pipe prover 84 process conditions 12 proving 9 repeatability 77 volumetric master meters 104. 143 transmitter 134 P Pickoff detectors xxi.

229 mass flow 212. 136 rezeroing 200. 52. 144 calibration 9. 92. 3 accuracy 210 analog output 48. 20 proving computer 61 volume base xxiii meter factor calculation 80. 91 prover size recommendations 100 small volume prover 98. 243 tube stiffness 211 Process conditions xxii.1 mass flow measurement 208. 143 density proving 151 meter information 47. 89 accumulating pulses 89 damping 55. 93 transfer standard proving 30 volume measurement 18 volumetric tank proving 79 Index Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 261 . 98 K-factor 45 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19 pipe prover 85 pressure measurement device 63 process conditions 124 size 90. 230 compensation custody transfer 35 density accuracy 229–231 density measurement 142 density measurement device 65 mass flow accuracy 212–214 mass flow measurement 210 meter recommendations 133 recommendations 159 volumetric flow rate accuracy 243 effect density 18. 100 small volume prover 91. 212 prover volume 23 sensor 229 volume 242. 217 stability 124 temperature 151 transfer standard proving 31 troubleshooting 160 uncertainty 108 volume measurement 18 volume meter factor 121 zero offset 199 zero stability 214 ProLink software program . Modbus protocol Prover detectors density averaging device 65 density measurement 28 mass measurement 23. See HART protocol. 57 meter zeroing 197 troubleshooting with 135 using for simulation 53 volume measurement 30 Protocol. 95 pulse interpolation 93 volume measurement minimum volume proving 19 prerun xxii. 143 connecting to transmitter 145 density measurement density device 65 digital output 46. 99 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 stationary conventional pipe prover 85 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19. See also HART Communicator calibration 158 communication configuration 46–48. 86. 112 density 142 density measurement hydrometer 146 pipe prover 85 small volume prover 94 volumetric tank proving 79 density measurement device 64 density proving installations 148 laboratory analysis 147 long run times 110. 160 Coriolis meter proving 110. 209 meter zero influences 214 zeroing 197 Pressure coefficient 210. 94 volume meter factor 121 Coriolis meters 5 correction factors conventional pipe prover 88 Coriolis master meter 116 meter factor uncertainty 126 small volume prover 97 volumetric tank proving 82 volumetric transfer standard 109 damping 55 density measurement 141 detector switch 89. 117 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 master meter proving 106 meter proving 12 proving calculations 29 repeatability 90. 26 optical 94. 103 reproducibility 126.

102 number of proving passes 247. 118 density averaging device 65 density factor calculation 156 density meter at the prover 26 determining process fluid density 64 equipment 62 flow rate 56 introduction 4 inventory calculations 128 mass meter factor 123 proving calculations 22. 17 mass meter factor 122 meter factor calculation 85. 148. 155 calculations 155 density measurement 146. 249 number of proving runs 90 262 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 94 accumulating pulses 99 Coriolis meter passes 102 number of passes/runs 101 pulse output for volume 95 report form 157 sample 157 run xxii . 30 Proving technique 35 Coriolis master meter 113 reproducibility 128 volumetric master meter 106 Pycnometer xxiii. 26. 98 recommendations 134. See also Proving. 153 calibration 161 density factor 156. 158. 29. 124 proving computers 61 proving procedure density measurement 28 mass measurement 24 transfer standard proving 31 volume measurement 20 pulse output 45 pipe prover 89 small volume prover 95. 26 predicting 247–250 small volume prover 25. 152. 94 proving recommendations 134 volume meter factor 121 Proving method 71. 29. 249 repeatable output 117 temperature 90.Index Proving density 149. 150. 117 average meter factors 102 damping factor 111. 94. 65 flow rate 71 in-line 71 meter factor uncertainty 125 proving connections 42 volume meter factor 121 volumetric xxii. 150 density sampling loop 151 repeatability 160 R Repeatability 123–125 Coriolis master meter 118 cross-talk 219 custody transfer 5 damping factor 91. 104 mass meter measurement 115 meter factor uncertainty 126 number of proving runs 123 tank 17 conventional pipe prover 84 Coriolis master meter 113 damping factor recommendation 90 volumetric master meters 106 traceability 71 transfer standard 30 uncertainty 127 volume meter measurement 117 Proving process laboratory analysis 147 proving 9 proving computer 61 volume measurement 18. 160 repeatability 125. 160 density measurement 64 density proving density measurement 154 density proving calculations 155 density proving device 65 density proving installations 148. 248. pass accumulating pulses 110. 147 density proving installations 149 procedure 154 recommendations 159 pass xxii. 94 conventional prover 25. 124 transfer standard proving 30 uncertainty 115 volume meter factor 121 volumetric master meters and transfer standards 106 Proving device custody transfer 4 density 61. 136 density averaging device 65 density measurement 142 flow rate 247 gravimetric tank proving 77 leakage 98 mass measurement Coriolis density 29 density meter at the prover 26 proving calculations 24 volume units 30 meter factor 102.

46 damping 54 density 151 density measurement 65 fluid flow rate 136. 228 mass flow 211 prover volume 19 volume 242 zero offset 216 Transfer standard proving 30–32. 160 vibration 218 volume measurement 20. 101 proving 248 proving computer 61 proving recommendations 134 proving runs 156 pulse accumulation 98–99 small volume prover 103 trend charts 12 troubleshooting 135. 106 transfer standard proving 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 263 . 231 proving accuracy 55 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 Rezeroing 56 analog output 48 error 199–201 frequency 197 installation recommendations 40 mass flow accuracy 220 reproducibility 136 sensor installation 133 trend charts 12 zero offset 215–217 RFT9712 transmitter 35 density measurement 142 inventory calculations 129 k-factor 52 low flow cut-off 56 number of proving passes 102 pressure 212 volume measurement 18 RFT9739 transmitter access to meter information 57 block diagram density 227 mass flow 209 Coriolis flowmeter 3 custody transfer 35. 232. 22. 32 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 83 Reproducibility 126. Pickoff sensors T Temperature accuracy 241 coefficient 210 correction coefficient 226 effect density 18. 214 pressure effect density factor offset 161 density measurement 229. 104–111 Coriolis master meter 111 equipment configuration 31 volumetric master meter 105 number of passes per run 248 techniques 104 uncertainty 108 volumetric master meters 105. ELITE sensor. Model D sensor. 142 Sensor. 127 density factors 158 meter factors 136 Response time analog density 145 Coriolis master meter 111. 228 flow rate accuracy 241 meter mass flow accuracy 208. 27. 99 reproducibility 136 tank proving 90 digital density 144 flow measurement 53 pressure measurement 213. 243 frequency schematic decreased/limited voltage 50 open collector 50 standard 50 inventory calculations 128 K-factor 52 local access terminals 57 low-flow cutoff 56 meter measurement 129 pressure compensation 212. 213. 210. 231 troubleshooting 136 recommendations density measurement 142–146 meter 133 summary 159 viewing zero reading 198 volume measurement 18 zeroing 197 RTD xxi conventional pipe prover 85 density measurement 227. 211 small volume prover 94 temperature measurement device 63 volumetric tank proving 79 Index S Sampling systems 4. 160 damping factor prerun duration 56. 89.1 poor with leakage 89 pressure devices 152 prover size 90. 136. See Coriolis sensor.

215 guidelines 202 meter mass flow accuracy 214. Meter factor. 216 determination 200 error 199 guidelines 202 mass flow accuracy 215. 217 uncertainty 115 uncertainty xxii. 127 meter performance 134. 126. 18 Volumetric meter 105 mass measurement 4 264 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 202.Index Trend chart 12. 159 Volumetric flow rate 242 accuracy 243 analog output 48 custody transfer 4 digital information 46 frequency output 49 measurement 241 output signals 45 turbine meters 105 volume measurement 17. See Meter zeroing. 217 zeroing xxii Zero uncertainty 214 Zeroing. 200. 128 flow calibrations factors 130 meter factor 127. 35. 159–161 analog output 146 frequency/pulse output 53 proving methods 17 pulse output 114 volume measurement 18 Z Zero offset xxii. 216 density influence 220 temperature effect 217 proving 201 proving guidelines 11 trend charts 12 viewing 198 volumetric flow rate accuracy 243 stability xxii. 160 reproducibility 158 rezeroing 133 sample proving 13 Troubleshooting 131–137. Zero V Volume meter factor 121. 128.

.

com Micro Motion Europe Groeneveldselaan 6 3903 AZ Veenendaal The Netherlands Tel +31 (0) 318 549 549 Fax +31 (0) 318 549 559 Micro Motion Asia 1 Pandan Crescent Singapore 128461 Republic of Singapore Tel (65) 777-8211 Fax (65) 770-8003 Micro Motion Inc. A recycled paper . Micro Motion. Inc.Visit us on the Internet at www. All rights reserved P/N 1004732.micromotion. Colorado 80301 Tel (303) 530-8400 (800) 522-6277 Fax (303) 530-8459 Fax (303) 530-8459 ©1998. USA Worldwide Headquarters 7070 Winchester Circle Boulder. Rev.

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- PVTSim Method Docby KamalShawqi
- Fluid Mechanics - Reciprocating Pump Test Rig, Centrifugal Pump Test Rig (2 H.P. ), 5 HP Centrifugal Pump Test Rig and Air Flow Bench (Pitot Tube_Anemometer) Manufacturer & Exporter From Roorkee, Indiaby Mukesh Kumar
- matter test study guide keyby api-293263627
- mukuby Mukesh Raj Purohit

- B2590_API_RP_551
- Fusible Plug Loop Panel1
- EIL Spec for Instrumentation Works
- Instrproving Coriolis for Custody
- LPG Pipeline Metering
- TECH
- selection of flow meter
- Cadangan Membina Pondok Pengawal Keselamatan
- V100 Sales Brochure Elster Metering
- Regulatory Schedule of Fees for Permits, Clearances, And Oth
- usermanual em6400.v01
- 2011
- 400-20 (Meter Manual)
- Science Quiz 2010
- Quantitative Aptitude Shortcuts
- null
- AgCatalog2013-2014
- Variable Area Flow Meter Explanation
- REPORT 1
- St20c, St20t, St20s Manual En
- Flid Mechanics Assignment
- Tvm Manual
- Analysis of Constant Torque Profile Motor
- Energy Audit
- PVTSim Method Doc
- Fluid Mechanics - Reciprocating Pump Test Rig, Centrifugal Pump Test Rig (2 H.P. ), 5 HP Centrifugal Pump Test Rig and Air Flow Bench (Pitot Tube_Anemometer) Manufacturer & Exporter From Roorkee, India
- matter test study guide key
- muku
- Chapter 1_Keys to the Study of Chemistry
- International Parking Meters Study
- Proving