## Are you sure?

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

.

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

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

. . . . . . . . . . .4 6. . . . . . . . . . . . .1 5. . . . .4 5.5 6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Bell 202 Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vertical Pipeline . . . . . . . . .2 Sensor Mounting . . . . . . . Liquid Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Analog Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination . . Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero . .5 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters iii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 37 39 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Location of Proving Connections . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy .Contents 4 5 Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wiring to Allow Field-Access to Meter Information . . . . . . . . . . . .2 6. . . . . Gas Measurement . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interface to Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Flow Tube Orientation . Low-Flow Cutoff . . . . . . . . 43 46 47 47 47 48 49 49 49 52 53 53 53 54 56 56 57 6. . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . Response Time/Damping . . . . Additional Flow Measurement Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 6. . Minimizing External Influences on the Meter . . Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the RS-485 Output . . . . . . . 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

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

. . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions .Contents 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . Recommended Proving Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters v . . . . . . Master Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 8. Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration Recommendation . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendations . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Meters. . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . .3 Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prover Size Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover Uncertainty. . . Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Passes/Runs . . . .4 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment and Procedures . .

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

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

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

. . . 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 . . . RFT9739 field-mount local access terminals. . . . . . RFT9739 standard frequency schematic . Volumetric proving against a storage tank . . . . . . . . Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric tank proving . . . . . RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional pipe prover . . . Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices . . . . . . Meter Factor trend chart . . Gravimetric proving with tanker truck . . . . . . . . . Small volume prover. . Transfer standard proving configuration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter . . . . . . . Typical sensor installation. . . Coriolis meter response during proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample proving trend chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Coriolis sensor orientation . . . . . . . Outlet piping design for filling tank provers . . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum mass proving configuration . . . . Maximum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . Double-chronometry pulse interpolation . Double-walled vacuum-sphere pycnometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical density proving report . . Coriolis master meter proving. . . . . . Average meter factors for multiple proving runs . . . . Series density proving installation . . . RFT9739 rack-mount local access terminals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down . . . Parallel density proving installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass proving with a density meter . . . . . . . . . . Minimum volumetric proving configuration . . . Mass proving using Coriolis density. Gravimetric proving with weigh tank. . . . . . . . . . .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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . 71 Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure . . . . . . 101 Repeatability versus number of passes per run . . . . 99 Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters . . . . . . . . . .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 . . . . . . . . 103 Trend Chart data . . . 128 x Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . Pressure effect on density measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simplified model of an operating Coriolis sensor . . . . . Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications. Mounting for sensor vibration isolation. . . . . Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . Temperature effect on mass flow rate measurement . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on density 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .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. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement . . . Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 172 182 182 187 210 217 219 230 233 234 237 248 xii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of sound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density conversion factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for flow . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero uncertainty specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for density . . . . . . . Number of passes per run . . . . . . . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . FD and K3 values . . . . . . . . . .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 . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving conversion factors . . . . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . Meter Zero Chart. Volumetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .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. . Volumetric Master Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . . . . . 166 167 168 169 170 171 176 177 178 179 180 181 186 187 192 193 204 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters xiii . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . Density Factor Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass. . . . . . . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass. . Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . Meter Factor Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions. . . . . Conventional Pipe Prover Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . Volumetric Master Meter . . . .

xiv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

Proving run — A complete proving cycle. xvi Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Prover prerun — The time between launching the piston or ball and the start of pulse accumulation from the meter. 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. Calibration — The process of using a reference standard to determine a calibration factor. (The zeroing operation should not be confused with resetting the totalizer). Each sensor size and model has a unique zero stability value. between its detector switches. determined when the meter is zeroed. Calibration adjusts the output of the meter to bring it to a value which is within the specified accuracy tolerance. This process is normally conducted by the meter manufacturer. Optional devices such as burst disks. Transmitter — The electronics assembly that powers the driver and processes the signals from the sensor pickoffs to provide meaningful mass flow and density output. Waterdraw — The process of calibrating a volumetric proving device against a NISTcertified volumetric field-standard test measure.73 psia or 15°C and 101 kPa. Zeroing — A procedure to determine a zero value that represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs at zero flow. Proving pass — The operation of the prover displacer traversing the calibrated volume of the prover. drains and vents can be supplied to accommodate hazardous area installations. in order to establish a meter factor that equates the two quantities. at operating conditions. which can consist of one or more proving passes. This process is normally conducted in the field. obtained from multiple meter zeroings. which can be found in the sensor specifications.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. to a reference of known quantity. Proving Terms Base prover volume — The volume of the prover corrected to standard conditions of 60°F and 14. The source of this uncertainty is limitations in the transmitter’s ability to sample and measure the small signal levels from the pickoffs. Zero offset — The difference between the true zero value and the stored zero value. Zero stability or zero uncertainty — A number that represents the statistical variation in the stored zero value. 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. The zero value is used by the transmitter to calculate flow rate. Stored zero — The zero value stored in the transmitter. Proving — The process of comparing the indicated quantity that passes through a meter under test.

by the density registered by the meter. Flowing density — The density of the liquid at actual flowing temperature and pressure. Pycnometer — A vessel of known volume and mass.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. which is filled with fluid and weighed to determine the density of the fluid. Density factor — A number obtained by dividing the actual density of the fluid measured by a density reference (typically a pycnometer).73 psia or 15°C and 101 kPa). 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 .

xviii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

8 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

If the operating conditions vary significantly during operation. and should be conducted when the operating conditions are most representative of the typical operating conditions. and to verify that meter accuracy is within specification over a range of flow rates.05%. and (2) contract. The calculated uncertainty of the calibration facility is better than ±0. which falls under government Weights and Measures requirements. the density calibration factors for the meter are also determined. the meter’s calibration factors are determined. under which a contractual agreement between a buyer and seller specifies requirements. Custody transfer flow measurements are performed for accounting of product quantities in order to establish monetary value of deliveries between sellers and buyers. or temperatures. When a calibration is performed. 2. Proving is usually performed under one set of conditions. Every Micro Motion® meter is calibrated in a gravimetric calibration lab to determine the meter’s fundamental mass flow calibration factor. This is accomplished by comparing the reading from the meter to a calibrated reference device. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 9 . based on ISO 5168. to determine if different meter factors are needed for each set of conditions.1 What Is Proving Versus Calibration? Calibration is typically performed in a laboratory at several different flow rates. The calibration lab employs water as the flowing medium. it is beneficial to prove the meter under the different operating conditions.2 General Proving Concepts 2. 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. densities. The meter is proved to ensure product inventory accounting is of the highest accuracy. The Micro Motion calibration lab employs weigh scales whose calibration is traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 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. During the flow calibration procedure. The correction factor is multiplied by the reading from the meter to offset the meter measurement. Proving differs from calibration in that it is performed in the field under operating conditions. When a meter is proved in the field. a meter correction factor is determined. The meter measurement being proved can be flow rate or density. The weigh-scale readings are corrected for buoyancy effect. The density calibration is performed using two fluids — air and water. 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.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 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. 10 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it is essential to show that a plan is in place for routinely verifying equipment accuracy. The objective is to verify the meter is performing within specification. Quality Audit A routine meter verification plan should be established to comply with ISO 9000 quality requirements. The discussion thus far has been general. The primary purpose of such an audit is to verify that transferred material is accounted for. If a meter is used for controlling the addition of various fluid components to make a final product. so that there is no loss of product along the way. (Eq. applies only to flow rate proving. 2. compared to a known reference. to ensure material balances in manufacturing and pipeline transfers are correct. For quality and environmental audits. meter performance must be repeatable to ensure product quality does not decline. The basic calculation that applies to all provings. whether the measurement being proved is flow or density. Density proving is covered in Section 11.0000 indicates that the meter is under-registering (reading low). presented in Sections 3 through 10. and can be applied to proving either the meter’s flow rate or density measurement. A field reference device is used to prove the meter. The meter correction factor defined in Equation 2-1 is commonly referred to as a meter factor.2 General Proving Concepts What Is the Outcome of Proving? Proving must be performed under actual operating conditions. • Proving results can be used to determine new meter calibration factors. As part of this environmental accounting. Environmental Audit An environmental audit might be required by the EPA. The remaining discussion. 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. A meter factor less than 1. Master meter verification methods are also acceptable. 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 meter factor greater than 1. to ensure product quality remains consistent. Therefore.3 What Is the Outcome of Proving? The objective of proving a meter is to determine what the meter reading is. The most common result of proving is to use a calculated meter factor to correct the meter’s flow rate indication. and to recalibrate if it is out of specification. and to provide evidence that meter verification is being conducted on a regularly scheduled basis. OSHA. or other governing body. 2-1) Prover Value Meter Correction Factor = -----------------------------------------Meter Reading • A decision can be made whether to return equipment to the manufacturer for checkup/recalibration.0000 indicates that the meter is over-registering (reading high). A more flexible meter verification plan can be used. Because environmental regulation requirements are escalating. is described by Equation 2-1. Therefore. The meter’s flow measurement is multiplied by the meter factor to provide the correct inventory.

the meter should be reproved if the flow rate varies significantly from the normal operating flow rate. pressure. When the sensor or transmitter is replaced.) 8. When the meter is rezeroed. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 11 . When the meter is initially brought into service. The following list details all of the conditions under which a meter might need to be proved. to provide data on their particular applications. When there is a significant change in the system temperature. When a change in flow rate occurs. However. As confidence in the meter performance becomes established. It is generally recommended that new users who have little experience with Coriolis meters should prove their first meters at least monthly. 2. 2. the proving contract specifies how often proving must be performed.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 2.4 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. Proving the meter over a range of flow rates might be necessary to determine acceptable flow rate tolerances. 5. proving is typically performed anytime the meter is subjected to changes in conditions which might cause a change in measurement accuracy. One way to determine the frequency of proving is to collect proving data on an initial group of meters. Although. Refer to Appendix E. the proving frequency can be reduced. If the meter is being used to measure bidirectional flow (forward and reverse flow). However. Refer to Appendix E. if the meter factor changes each time the meter is proved. Proving the meter more frequently after the meter is initially installed will speed up the process of determining the required meter proving frequency. 3. 7. that would affect meter accuracy.5 How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? Typically. As required by the contract or proving schedule. then more frequent proving is appropriate. or density. When the sensor is returned to service after having been removed from the process pipeline. if the change might cause the meter to exceed the accuracy limits set forth in the contract. Also.) Because the objective of proving is to obtain the most accurate product accounting that is possible. more provings might be required for a new installation. 1. for a discussion on meter zeroing. a zero offset would result in different meter factors for the forward and reverse directions. and on a regularly scheduled basis thereafter. page 195. 9. these are not requirements. (Characterizing the meter’s zero can preclude having to prove when the meter is zeroed. the real determinant should be the performance of the meter from one proving to the next. and the proving frequency determined for these meters can be applied to all meters on similar service. If there is little or no change in meter factor between provings. In lieu of any test data. Conversely. the level of proving can be decreased. (Refer to Appendix F. or anytime the sensor mounting conditions are changed. provings should be performed to establish meter factors for each direction. 6. page 195. the meter calibration factor does not change between forward and reverse flow. 4. page 205. Anytime the accuracy of a meter is questioned by either party involved in the custody transfer.

The frequency of proving will also depend on contract requirements. to gain an understanding of any influences on the meter. • • • • • • • • • • • • 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. Additional information on using trend charts is presented in Section 9. but might not be acceptable for custody transfer measurement. A blank trend chart. However. Semiannual or annual provings might be sufficient for ISO 9000 certification. page 126. 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. Increasing the Time Between Provings After sufficient data is accumulated. varying composition and viscosity Trend charts can be used to collect this type of information.25% from one proving to the next. it might be acceptable to increase the time between provings — quarterly. or whether multiple meter factors are necessary for different operating conditions. Corrosive or erosive process fluids warrant more frequent proving. and establishing requirements for rezeroing the meter. After the user has demonstrated the required proving frequency on an initial group of meters. It is never recommended to go any longer than one year between meter provings. It is common practice that the meter factor vary by no more than ±0. If the operating conditions will 12 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . for a discussion on determining meter zeroing requirements.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. it is useful to perform several provings across the entire operating range. for each proving. It is desirable to record the parameters listed below directly on the trend chart. Refer to Appendix E. to determine whether using a single meter factor will suffice for all operating conditions. the actual requirement is either specified in the contract or required by Weights and Measures authorities.6. semiannually or annually. page 195. 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. Trend charts are also an excellent means of tracking variations in the meter’s zero offset. Figure 2-1 shows an example of a meter trend chart. is included on page 192. Varying Process Conditions If the meter will be operated over a range of process conditions.

3.05% • 0. Sample proving trend chart.9975 0.6098 9/6/98 410 – – – 93 No 82 89 .6111 Was meter rezeroed? 0. Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run ABC Company Butadiene XYZ Proving Co.6126 7/5/98 445 – – – 95 No 82 89 .0050 1.614 6/7/98 450 – – – 92 No 80 90 . Calibration Factor K–Factor CMF300 123456789 RFT9739 987654321 667.6196 3/8/98 400 – – – 65 No 73 90 .6154 5/3/98 440 – – – 85 No 78 88 .0075 1.0025 1.0000 0.00% • • • • • • • Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 13 .10% 0. Location Fluid Proving Co.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 Figure 2-1.15% Repeatability 0.08661 4 Mass Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.584.6112 8/2/98 435 – – – 94 No 84 87 .75 60 pulse/lb Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.6175 4/5/98 395 – – – 75 No 76 88 .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 .9950 0.

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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. . . . . . . . . . . Using a Density Meter at the Prover . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . Mass proving using Coriolis density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Volume Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer standard proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . .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 . . . . Mass proving with a density meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . Minimum Mass Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured For Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum mass proving configuration . . . . . . . . .1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Volume Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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.1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement A Coriolis meter measures mass flow rate and density independently. Additional technical details about the meter’s volume measurement are presented in Appendix H. (Eq. there are differences in the operation of the Coriolis meter that will require special consideration. it can be treated like any volumetric meter. Although the methods for proving Coriolis meters and volumetric meters are very similar. These 3. many companies prefer to account for product on a standard volume basis. Details of how these measurements are performed are presented in Appendices F and G. 2. as shown in Equation 3-2. where q =Calculated volume flow · m =Measured mass flow ρ =Measured density Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 17 . Using a transfer standard to prove a Coriolis meter when the prover is undersized. Proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. page 239. 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 ). These procedures are generally applicable to master meters methods and tank proving methods. For reasons of accounting tradition. with some modification. Both conventional pipe provers and small volume provers are flow through volumetric proving device.73 psia. it can also be used for determining volumetric flow rate. Proving methods using other equipment listed above are discussed in detail in Section 8. Because the meter measures both mass and density. page 67. generally 60°F and 14.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Proving is performed by using a field reference device to verify the meter’s flow measurement accuracy. The field reference device can be stationary or portable. ™ This discussion on proving procedures is divided into three main topics: 1. The measured volume is calculated as shown in Equation 3-1. and 3. 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. Proving a Coriolis meter configured for volume measurement.

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

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

Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. page 119. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. 5.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 4. Equation 3-6 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. If the repeatability is acceptable. Proving form A-1. and must be diverted around the meter. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. 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). 2. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. Check for leaks. 8. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. illustrates the maximum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement.* 100 Pulses MIN 20 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 3.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. 10. page 166 (Appendix A). and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary. Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. 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. 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. Pressure and temperature at the prover is not representative of the conditions at the meter. Components have been added to the minimum system to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. Perform proving calculations. 9. can be used to record the proving data and perform the proving calculations. 6. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter. 7. Maximum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-2. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. page 21. 3-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp MF v = -------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor where MFv = Meter factor. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. 3-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Repeatability(%) = --------------------------------------------------------. 11. (Eq. provides additional details on proving calculations. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle.

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

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

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

025% repeatability allowance for the meter and the rest of the proving system.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. when performing a mass-tovolume proving. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. This where ρp = fluid density under flowing conditions at the prover Section 9. Then the meter factors for the individual proving runs are calculated as shown in Equation 3-9. the pulse repeatability may be unacceptable. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. page 176 (Appendix B).3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 6.* 100 MF MIN Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. the repeatability can be based on the number of pulses accumulated. This leaves only a 0. Based on a fluid with a density of 0. Therefore. the pulse repeatability would not account for variations in product density. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. and shows the calculation steps.025% of the repeatability specification. (Eq.0002 g/cc. A look-up table or an equation is used to obtain the density of the fluid from the recorded pressure and temperature. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. 7. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. this level of density variation would take up 0. can be used to record data. for mass-to-volume proving. The product density during the proving should vary by no more than 0. 10. 11. calculation is shown in Equation 3-8. Perform proving calculations. 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). 3-8) MF MAX – MF MIN Repeatability(%) = ----------------------------------------. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are determined from Equation 3-9.8 g/cc. and the repeatability is based on the maximum and minimum meter factors from the runs. the product density must first be determined. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. provides additional information on proving calculations. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. page 119. the Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. 8. If the product density were to vary during the proving. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. For volumeto-volume proving. not the accumulated pulses. Before calculating the meter factor. Proving form B-1. However. the repeatability should be based on the meter factor for the individual provings. Next. 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. (Eq. 24 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. 9. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving.

4. 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. page 23. V2. 3. and must be diverted around the meter. beyond those shown in Figure 3-3. which includes valves V1. Proving Equipment Additional components of this mass metering/proving system. 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. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 25 . Components have been added to the minimum mass proving system to accommodate the following circumstances: 1. Figure 3-4 illustrates the equipment requirement for this scenario. requiring an average density to be determined.0002 g/cc) during the proving pass or run. The density at the prover cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through 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. It applies when the density cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements at the prover. 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. Add only those items that are needed for the particular application. 2. Mass proving with a density meter. This is required for applications in which the flow through the pipeline cannot be stopped. All of these components may not be required.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Figure 3-4. and V3. Requirements for using a density meter at the prover for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement.

can be used to record data. Although form C-1 specifies that it is for proving the Coriolis meter density. (Figure 3-4 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. The density meter must be enabled. and V9. This will either be obtained from the density meter or the density averager. to ensure the density factor is repeatable.2°C. The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the density meter’s density measurement during the proving run. 2. beyond those described beginning on page 23. Valve V11 is still used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. it must be enabled. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. page 146. page 119. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving pass or run. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. it is applicable to any density meter.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement using a density meter at the prover. 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 is accomplished by opening valves V7. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated as shown in Equation 3-11. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8.4. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors and the density meter’s density measurement output. 5. if required. Care should be taken to ensure that flashing or cavitation does not result from dropping the pressure. as shown in Equation 3-10. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. page 186 (Appendix C). the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. and shows the calculation steps. Valve V11 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. Proving form B-1. If the fluid is expansive. are described below: 1. page 24). This process is repeated two to three times. 7. 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. for a complete description of this process. the repeatability value is calculated by using the meter factor.) Once conditions have stabilized. (Eq. Density proving form C-1. page 176 (Appendix B). An additional calculation is also performed: the determination of the density meter’s density factor. 26 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . which are depicted in Figure 3-4. the system is returned to normal operation by opening valve V8 and closing valves V10 and V9. For safety reasons valve V8 would need to be opened before closing valves V10 and V9. a density sample is collected and the density meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. page 25. Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. Therefore. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. provides additional information on proving calculations. 3. After the density factor has been determined. is used for determining the density meter’s density factor. (Eq. Refer to Section 11. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. 6. If the optional density averager is used. 3-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MF m = --------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses --------------------------------- K–Factor Section 9. While the meter is being proved. 4. the density reading from the density meter is recorded along with the other proving data. the density meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined. V10.

illustrates a density proving system that is installed parallel to the Coriolis meter. requiring an average density to be determined. The cost of the proving system is reduced because an additional density meter is not required. If the conditions at the prover and Coriolis meter are not similar. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlm determination from temperature measured at the meter. 2. • Optional Cplm determination from pressure measured at the meter. The bypass allows flow to be diverted around the meter to allow meter zeroing. The advantages and disadvantages of series and parallel density proving systems are discussed in detail in Section 11. page 23. Maintenance is reduced because one less instrument is used in the system. This is required for applications in which the flow through the pipeline cannot be stopped. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. page 146. 3.4. 2. page 23. are described below: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 27 . An in-series density proving system can also be used. The density at the prover cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements. to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. include: • A density proving system for the Coriolis meter • An optional density averager. V2. 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. Figure 3-5. The system includes an optional bypass loop to allow meter zeroing. to correct the fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlp determination from temperature measured at the prover. to correct the fluid volume to standard temperature All of the components may not be required. additional pressure and temperature measurements at the meter will be required to correct the density measurement to prover conditions. and V3. The Coriolis meter samples the entire fluid stream. page 28. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard temperature • Optional Cplp determination from pressure measured at the prover. The disadvantage of using this system is that the density measurement is not located at the prover. Components have been added to the minimum mass proving system. beyond those described beginning on page 23. shown in Figure 3-3.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. page 28. 4. and must be diverted around the meter. 3. Add only those items that are needed for the particular application. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. which eliminates problems associated with sampling systems that are required with most density meters. Figure 3-5. Proving Equipment Additional components of this mass metering/proving system. which includes valves V1. if the fluid density does not remain constant during the proving • An optional bypass loop. beyond those shown in Figure 3-3. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter.

4. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving run. If the optional density averager is used. Therefore. which are depicted in Figure 3-5. the density reading from the Coriolis meter is recorded along with the other proving data. The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the Coriolis meter’s density measurement during the proving run. or V6 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. it may be necessary to record pressure and temperature at the Coriolis meter. 3. Valves V3. 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. This is accomplished by opening valves V7 and V8. This process is repeated two to three times to ensure the density factor is repeatable. In addition to recording the pressure and temperature at the prover. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. Prior to proving the meter. Valve V3. Mass proving using Coriolis density. the system is returned to normal operation by closing valves V7 and V8. Requirements for using a Coriolis meter density measurement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement.2°F. If the fluid is expansive. page 146.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement Figure 3-5. 28 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . While the meter is being proved. Refer to Section 11. After the density factor has been determined. 2. 5. a density sample is collected and the Coriolis meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. 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. 6. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors.) Once conditions have stabilized. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined. (Figure 3-5 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. V4. V4. it must be enabled. 4. for a complete description of this process. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. and the Coriolis meter’s density measurement output. and V6 are fully opened. 7. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted.

page 187. a separate density averager is not required. Equation 3-11 can be used as long as the process conditions at the Coriolis meter and the prover are the same. are described below: 1. the repeatability is calculated by using the meter factor. The Coriolis meter’s density reading and density factor are used in this equation. and perhaps adjusted. page 28). Density proving form C-1. page 28. The disadvantages of this approach are: 1. page 24). The Coriolis meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. because the meter is continuously sampling the process fluid density. and then changed back to the original value when it is returned to mass measurement. Section 9. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. 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. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement by using its pulse output to indicate volume. can be used to record data. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated using Equation 3-11. is used to determine the density factor. 2. The advantages of this approach are: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 29 . Prior to proving the meter. and shows the calculation steps. The meter configuration parameters must be accessed. 2. beyond those described in Section 3. (Eq. To ensure the product inventory is not compromised during the proving. the meter’s K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. the same equation that was used for the density meter at the prover. Proving form B-1. The volume measurement obtained from the Coriolis meter will integrate any density variations. (Eq.1.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. The Ctl and Cpl correction factors are determined from API MPMS lookup tables. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. and back to mass measurement after proving. 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. the density at the Coriolis meter must be converted to the prover conditions by using Equation 3-13. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined (Step 3. and the meter must be changed from mass to volume measurement during proving. Before the proving is initiated. page 186 (Appendix C). Alternately. page 176 (Appendix B). page 26. 3-12) Density from Density Sample DF = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density Reading 1. page 119. 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. 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. Proving Equipment The equipment required is the same as shown in Figure 3-5. is used to convert the Coriolis meter density to prover conditions as shown in Equation 3-13. except the density averager is entirely eliminated. page 17). If this is not the case. then return the configuration to mass measurement for normal measurement. If the fluid density varies during the proving. provides a more detailed discussion of proving calculations. page 17.1. 2. Established volume proving procedures can be used (as described in Section 3.

1. the more measurement samples that are made. If the proving run is too short. a transfer standard proving method can be employed. Since there is no fixed prover volume limiting the proving time. (Eq. Equation 3-5. If a larger prover is not available. Adjustments to this value or the inventory calculation may be required to ensure that the inventory measurement remains correct during the proving. there is usually a drop in flow rate. the Coriolis meter will inherently perform fewer measurements. The K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. This will result in an error in the meter factor that is determined. The turbine meter is first proved against the prover. and form C-1. The mass meter factor is then determined by multiplying the Coriolis meter’s density factor by the volume meter factor as shown in Equation 3-14.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving Communicator or the Micro Motion ProLink software program. page 22. then the Coriolis meter is proved against the turbine meter. The volume meter factor is calculated from either Equation 3-6. resulting in a more precise measurement. page 20. The meter is proved as a volume meter as described in Section 3. 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The fundamental measurement of a Coriolis meter is time based. the master meter’s meter factor has not been established under actual operating conditions. The master meter is brought out to the field. as shown in Proving form A-1. whichever is appropriate. The meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. and cannot be used to provide accurate. and is used as the reference to determine a meter factor for the test meter. In some applications the prover is too small for the Coriolis meter. If the prover prerun is too short. The longer the proving time. The transfer standard method uses a meter with a very fast response time. the Coriolis meter pulse output may not represent the actual flow rate before the pulse accumulation begins. and depends on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. is used to obtain the volume meter factor (MFv). The calculation shown in Equation 3-14 can be added to the bottom of form A-1. page 20. or Equation 3-7. 3. the repeatability calculation can be based on the number of pulses measured. repeatable proving results. resulting in poorer repeatability. page 17. 4. ® 3. It is important to distinguish transfer standard proving from master meter proving. The meter is returned to the mass measurement configuration once the proving is completed. Therefore. page 186 (Appendix C). page 166 (Appendix A). there may be difficulties in obtaining good repeatability. Master meter proving has uncertainty associated with the effect of the actual operating conditions on the master meter’s calibration. When the proving is initiated. is used to obtain the density factor (DF). This provides a longer time base for the Coriolis meter to perform measurements. such as a turbine meter. 5. due to a mismatch between the prover size and the Coriolis meter’s response time. resulting in improved repeatability. 3-14) MF m = MF v * DF Proving Calculations Because the meter is configured for volume measurement during the proving process.3 Transfer Standard Proving When using small volume provers or undersized conventional provers. page 29. the Coriolis meter and turbine meter measurements can be compared for one minute or more. to prove the Coriolis meter. Master meter proving typically utilizes a “master” meter that has been calibrated in a laboratory setting. This occurs most commonly when a small-volume prover is used to prove a relatively large Coriolis meter.

2. Refer to Section 3. This method can be used for a Coriolis meter configured for volume or mass measurement. the uncertainty associated with changing process conditions is eliminated. these components may be required. page 22.1. Only the minimum equipment requirement is shown. Flow Sensor V2 V1 V3 Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Prover detectors 2-channel pulse counter Prover loop For transfer standard proving. Proving Equipment Figure 3-6. and Section 3. 3.1. Any changes in the flow rate may affect the turbine meter’s meter factor. Transfer standard proving configuration.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving 3 Figure 3-6. The proving duration should be between one and two minutes. 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. page 17.2. A two-channel pulse counter. the turbine meter must first be proved. Requirements for using transfer standard for proving Coriolis meter. Then the transfer standard meter is used immediately to determine the meter factor for the Coriolis meter. page 22. The procedures described in Section 3. page 17. for additional equipment requirements. and Section 3. however. temperature and flow rate are recorded while the meter is being proved. A series of three to five proving runs are performed. the meter factor for the transfer standard meter is determined at actual operating conditions. 4. page 17. should be followed to prove the turbine meter. The unique items required for a transfer standard proving are: 1. page 31. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. The pressure. A volume meter factor (MFv) is determined for the turbine meter. The Coriolis meter is then proved against the turbine meter. For transfer standard proving. against the prover. 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 . A fast response turbine meter 2. illustrates the equipment requirement for performing a transfer standard proving. are presented below: 1.2. It is important that the turbine meter be proved at the same flow rate as the Coriolis meter.1. by activating the twochannel pulse counter to accumulate pulses from both meters. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in performing a transfer standard proving. beyond those described Section 3. Additionally. density meters and density averagers are not included. additional items such as bypass loops.

may be needed to correct to the conditions at the turbine. The meter factor is calculated as shown in Equation 3-16. or Equation 3-12. can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. page 179 (Appendix B).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. as shown by Equation 3-10. * 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. repeatability cannot be based on the pulses accumulated per proving run. as shown in Equation 3-7. proving form A-4. as shown in Equation 3-8. 3-16) Turbine Meter Pulses ---------------------------------------------------------------. (Eq. page 24. Volume Measurement Since the proving volume is not constant with this method. page 24. 32 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . if the temperature and pressure at the Coriolis meter and turbine meter are sufficiently different. page 29. can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. the repeatability must be based on the meter factor. but depends on the proving time. from a density meter at the prover. Then. The repeatability must be based on the meter factor. Proving form A-1. Then proving form B-4. page 169. Mass Measurement As with the other proving methods for a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. If required. is used to convert the density at the Coriolis meter to the transfer standard conditions. page 166 (Appendix A). or from the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. page 187. page 26. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. Proving form A-1. page 166 (Appendix A). page 29. These factors would be applied in the same fashion as for provers. If a density meter or the Coriolis meter are used to determine density. then Equation 3-13. If the Coriolis meter is used. page 22. density proving form C-1. 3-15) Turbine Meter Pulses * MF -------------------------------------------------------------turbine Turbine K–Factor MF v = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis Meter Pulses -------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis K–Factor However. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. The meter factor is calculated from Equation 3-15. is used to determine the density factor. a density factor will need to be determined. as shown in Equation 3-8. (Eq. page 186 (Appendix C). and form C-2. liquid temperature and pressure correction factors will be required.

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

36 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

38 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing 5 Figure 5-2. Recommended Coriolis sensor orientation. 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 .

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

. . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic. . . . . . . . . Wiring to Allow Field-Access to Meter Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interface to Digital Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bell 202 Multidrop Networks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 rack-mount local access terminals . . . . . . . .6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals 6. . . . . . . . . . . . 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 . . . . . . . . . . Response Time/Damping . . . RFT9739 field-mount local access terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Digital Information . . . . . Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the Bell 202 Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analog Output .2 6. . . . Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . Interfacing to Analog Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Duration of the Prover Prerun . Using the RS-485 Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional Flow Measurement Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices. . . . . . . . . RS-485 Multidrop Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low-Flow Cutoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency/Pulse Output . . . . . . . . .4 6. . . Coriolis meter response during proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero. 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. . . . . . K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 6. .

44 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

However. page 223. – 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). (Eq. as shown in Equation 6-4. 6-3) 1 ρ = C a -. The total number of pulses accumulated by the proving pulse counter is divided by the prover volume to obtain the meter’s K-factor. The analog outputs can represent mass and volumetric flow rate. (Eq. However. The frequency/pulse output can represent either mass or volumetric flow rate. (Eq. as well as density. 6-2) · m = K * ∆t A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. Details on density measurements are presented in Appendix G. Details on volumetric flow rate are presented in Appendix H. density. However. 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. as shown in Equation 6-1. a Coriolis meter’s K-factor does not describe its inherent flow calibration. reconfigure the meter. The density calibration constants Ca and Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 45 . as shown in Equation 6-3. 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. The K-factor represents the inherent calibration of the meter. While communicating digitally. This digital information can be accessed directly through the transmitter’s RS-485 or Bell 202 output. 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). and volumetric flow rate are calculated by the transmitter microprocessor. Additional circuitry in the transmitter is used to convert this digital information into a frequency/pulse output and analog outputs. analog outputs cannot be easily totalized. and therefore are difficult to prove. page 205. 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. as shown in Equation 6-2. and is typically determined by proving the meter. 6-1) Total Pulses Turbine K–Factor = -----------------------------------------Prover Volume Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated.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. and perform meter diagnostics. it is possible to read process variables. the digital flow rate reading cannot be easily proved using conventional proving equipment. The mass flow rate. page 239. (Eq. This output can be easily totalized and is readily proved.

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

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

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

as shown in the schematic in Figure 6-1b. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). the RFT9739 can be modified to make it an “open collector” output. terminal 15 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal 16 (RETURN) is the return line. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. A variety of proving counters can be used to accumulate pulses. shielded cable. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.3 Frequency/Pulse Output The frequency output from the meter is used primarily for batching and inventory measurement. For frequencies less than 1 Hz. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA.000 Hz. with a 1000 ohm load limit. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). However. the frequency output signal wiring must be 22 AWG (0.000 Hz input signal. page 50. avoid using a counter that will not accommodate at least a 5000 Hz input. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. and has out-of-range capability to 15. with 0. 6. terminal CN2-D24 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal CN2-D26 (RETURN) is the return.000 Hz. Although most devices accept a 10. which use an external power source from the prover counter. A schematic of the frequency output for the RFT9739 is shown in Figure 6-1a. The output circuit is rated to 30 VDC. page 50. For best results. This is different from many turbine and PD meters.1 amp maximum sinking capability. A pull-up resistor provides an output impedance of 2. There is one frequency output available from the RFT9739. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. Signal input requirements vary from one device to the next. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). Because the output is internally powered. The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. To provide sufficient pulse resolution. with a 15V logic level square wave. twisted-pair.3 mm2) or larger.1 to 10. so an external DC power supply is not required. unloaded. some are limited to 5000 Hz or lower. the meter does not require additional power input. the output is no longer 50/50 duty cycle. In this case only the SV output can be used. The pulse will be off (OV) for 0. The output is galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter.2 kohm at the 15 volt logic level.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/PulseOutput 6 Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered. 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. and be on (high voltage) for the remaining pulse duration. The frequency output can be scaled from 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 49 . The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA. 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.5 sec. The square wave has a 50/50 duty cycle for frequencies greater than 1 Hz. Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output The standard output is internally powered.

VF+ 15V 2.2 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.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 . 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. RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic. RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. Resistance is added to decrease input voltage to pulse counting device.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output Figure 6-1a. Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic.

the voltage that will be applied to the counter input can be determined using Equation 6-5. The RFT9739 outputs a 15V unloaded signal. Figure 6-2. The overall resistance is determined using Equation 6-7. all of the frequency devices must accept the same frequency output scaling from the transmitter. to limit the output voltage. (Eq. The only limitation to the number of devices that can be used is the overall resistive load. as illustrated in Figure 6-1c. The resistance from the signal wiring and the counter’s signal input circuitry will load this voltage down to a lesser value. - R1 R3 R3 where Vout = voltage level input into counter = resistance of signal wiring and R counter circuitry. Connection of multiple pulse-counting devices. 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. 6-7) 1 R = ------------------------------------1 1 1 ----. Equation 6-5 can be rearranged as shown in Equation 6-6.+ ----. (Eq.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. If this resistance value is known. 6-6) 2200 * Vout R = -----------------------------15 – V out More than one frequency counting device can be connected to the transmitter frequency output. to bring the voltage down to an acceptable value. or add a resistor across the input terminals to the counter. R2. which would require three devices wired in parallel. 6-5) 15 * R V out = ---------------------2200 + R (Eq.+ ----. to determine the required resistance for a given voltage limit. Figure 6-2 illustrates a common application. R3 = the resistance across each of the counting devices It might be necessary to add a Zener diode. In addition. ohms where R1.

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

the lower the frequency of operation of the meter. the digital value is capable of updating as fast as every 0.025 seconds. Use the rounded K-factor value for subsequent proving calculations. The fluid that flows through the meter over a set time interval is measured and totaled. The frequency/pulse output is derived from the digital measurement performed by the microprocessor. Confusion often results among those who are accustomed to proving turbine and PD meters. 6. round down the calculated K-factor to a convenient integer quantity. In addition. Every two tube cycles. 5. Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output To verify proper operation of the meter’s frequency/pulse output. Whereas turbine meters and PD meters produce pulses as their primary measurements. because the number of pulses per unit of measured mass is not a constant value. 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. rather than a constant. but can be scaled by the user. the update time of the flow rate measurement also depends on the damping factor that has been set in the transmitter. 6. Enter the maximum allowable frequency and the calculated flow rate into the transmitter. a simulation test can be performed. the microprocessor The actual update time will vary from one meter to the next. To avoid confusion. page 54. because sensors operate at different frequencies — smaller sensors operate at higher frequencies.4 Additional Flow Measurement Information In order to better understand the way Coriolis meters process and output the flow rate measurement. then resets the counters. Counters that are controlled by the microprocessor take four ∆t samples from the pickoffs during every tube cycle. The typical meter operates at 80 Hz. using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. larger sensors operate at lower frequencies. Based on the frequency scaling.” which indicates the value is a variable. 4. Calculate the K-factor from Equation 6-8. The microprocessor and frequency/pulse circuitry operates in the following fashion. The total is stored in a register. The sampling of the ∆t measurement from the sensor pickoffs is dependent on the tube frequency. The update time of the ∆t measurement depends on the natural frequency of the tube vibration. calculates the average ∆t. Coriolis meters produce a time difference (∆t) between the right and left pickoff detectors as their primary measurement. If desired. using the values determined from steps 1 and 2. This signal can be used to verify that the frequency/pulse output is interfacing properly with the prover counter. The higher the fluid density. changes in the density of the process fluid will also change the frequency of operation. there are several concepts that must be introduced: • Response time/damping • Low-flow cutoff • Meter zero reads in the total of eight ∆t samples.1 and 15. Using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. Using the rounded K-factor and the maximum allowable frequency. presents typical operating frequencies for a variety of sensors.000 Hz. calculate a new flow rate setting using Equation 6-9 (which is a variation of Equation 6-8).Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 3. the Coriolis meter K-factor could be more precisely referred to as a “pulse scaling factor. not pulse based. the microprocessor determines how many pulses Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 53 . therefore. the frequency/pulse output from the meter can be set to any desired value between 0. Table 6-1. In addition.

the frequency output of the meter is a reflection of the total flow measured by the meter. resulting in output signals that have inherent mechanical averaging. turbine meters and PD meters have significant inertia.8 g/cc 139 135 110 76 76 41 ρ=0. the frequency output will lag the change in the digital flow rate by approximately 0. In particular. Using a damping value of less than 0.1 incorporates first order filtering. it can lead to problems for some types of measurements. Therefore. without affecting overall measurement accuracy. results in a slight lag between an update in the digital flow rate and an update in the frequency output. The standard RFT9739 damping setting from the Micro Motion factory is 0. so internal microprocessor damping is available to average this signal over time and provide a more uniform output.8. damping is used to provide averaging of the signals over a longer time base before updating the digital values. Localized flow fluctuations and flow noise. the solid line represents the actual flow rate. the response time characteristics of the meter can lead to problems with undersized in-line field provers. The RFT9739 employs a selective digital software filter to accomplish this. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the input. resulting from flow pulsations and fluid turbulence characteristics. A damping value of 0 will result in no filtering being applied.2 uses second order filtering. The microprocessor keeps track of the number of pulses output versus the total in the register.1 54 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 ρ=0. The flow sensor is extremely responsive to the dynamics of the fluid flowing through the vibrating tubes. 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. the longer it will take for the digital values to be updated. a value of 0. Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy Although using damping is recommended for smoothing out the raw signal from the meter. The signal processing circuitry. For an instantaneous change in flow rate. For a better understanding of these concepts. which is used to convert the meter’s digital flow rate signal to a frequency output. In the graph in Figure 6-3. For process control applications. the raw flow measurement signal from a Coriolis meter exhibits significant variation. The lower the tube frequency. Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. This value is a filter coefficient.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Table 6-1. and deviations are accounted for and adjusted for in the next time interval.4.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 need to be output to correspond to the amount of fluid measured by the meter.1 seconds. the dotted line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. and is continually being adjusted to provide proper accounting of the total fluid flow through the meter. In contrast. so their mechanical sensing elements tend to dampen out small scale fluctuations in flow.1 is generally not recommended because no filtering is applied. The user-specified RFT9739 damping value can be varied from 0 to 1638.0012 g/cc 150 157 130 87 87 55 ρ=0. Basically. and any value over 0. the graph in Figure 6-3 illustrates how damping affects the reaction of the Coriolis meter to changes in flow rate.

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

Meter Zero As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter.0.1 is the flow rate output from the meter will have a greater degree of variation. The key is that the meter should respond as quickly as possible to variations in flow rate. higher or lower values can be programmed into the transmitter as needed. The damping factor should be set to 0. and details on assessing the need for rezeroing the meter. For an RFT9739 with software version 3. 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. If the flow rate falls below the low-flow cutoff value. or an RFT9739 transmitter with software version lower than 3. If the flow rate drops below the low-flow cutoff value. 6-10) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) Meter Accuracy Although meter response time issues can create difficulties in meter proving. The remaining ∆t represents the “true” mass flow rate. If the flow rate changes at the end of the proving run. must be determined.1. The analog low-flow cutoff is unaffected by the digital low-flow cutoff. a low-flow cutoff For the meter zeroing procedure. Refer to Equation 6-10 for the mathematical implementation of the meter zero. the baseline offset between the pickoffs. and the internal digital totalizers will stop counting. the meter’s flow rate indication will go to zero. The zero value (∆tzero) that is determined is subtracted by the transmitter from all subsequent time difference (∆tflow) measurements. there will generally be a low-level flow indication from the meter. 56 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The standard flow cutoff setting is 0. the low-flow cutoff must be set to zero when using an RFT9712 transmitter. To view the meter reading under no-flow conditions. The meter’s flow rate reading can be viewed with any compatible device that communicates digitally with the transmitter. and can be set independently. which may make it difficult to read a stable flow rate from the meter. a prerun time of 1 second would be more conservative. This process is called “zeroing” the meter. a “live zero” register can be viewed. A damping factor larger than 0. due to process variations.0 or higher. under non-flowing conditions. to limit meter factor errors. Using a larger damping factor will require a longer prerun time. The low-flow cutoff value for frequency/pulse output is the same as the digital low-flow cutoff value. even when there is no flow going through the sensor. to provide fast response time. refer to Appendix E.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. The HART Communicator is most commonly used for this task. Therefore. The only problem associated with using a low damping value of 0. it should be kept in mind that the accuracy of the meter is unaffected by changes in damping factor.67 seconds. should be employed. Low-Flow Cutoff Due to inherent variability in the signals from the pickoff detectors.8. (Eq. To prevent this low-level flow from being indicated or totalized. a prerun time of approximately 4 seconds will be required. However. page 195. Flow Rate Another consideration is flow rate variation while the meter is being proved. the frequency output will go to 0 Hz.05% of the sensor’s maximum full-scale flow rate. In order to use the factory standard damping factor of 0. the flow rate during proving should not fluctuate by more than ±10% during the proving run. However. a minimal amount of damping is recommended to average out some of the flow-induced noise.8 should not be used when proving meters with in-line provers. the same type of errors in the meter factor determination will result. which eliminates the need for removing the lowflow cutoff.

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

58 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

60 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

This feature can also be applied to conventional provers if desired. however. The voltage level from the proving detector switches are used to initiate the accumulation of pulses from the meter. a button is pushed and pulses are accumulated from both meters simultaneously. To initiate a proving. The types of devices commonly available for accomplishing this task are described below. These devices are commonly used for tank proving applications. which is used to accumulate pulses from the meter during the proving run.2 Pulse Counting Device The majority of proving applications involve acquiring all of the measurement data manually and performing hand calculations.3. Dual-Channel Proving Counters Dual-channel proving counters operate in the same manner as single channel proving counters. Ctl and Cpl correction factors • The ability to accept a 10.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pulse Counting Device • The ability to sample and average temperature and pressure to compute the Cts. inputs are provided for two meters. The pulse counting device must be capable of accepting the frequency output signal from the transmitter. Frequency Totalizers Frequency totalizers that have computational capability and a display. page 49. as in cases where pay-and-check meters are used. These devices will use the meter’s K-factor to compute and display the mass or volume measured by the meter. They can be used to prove two meters simultaneously. 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 . single frequency input from a meter. One of the key components in a manual proving system is the pulse counting device. 7. More commonly. They will display the total number of pulses accumulated from the meter during a proving run. they are used for master meter proving where the master meter and meter to be proved are both connected to the counter. Details on the characteristics of this output signal are presented in Section 6. Single-Channel Proving Counters Single-channel proving counters are used with conventional provers.000 Hz frequency input signal • If a small volume prover is being used. Cps. and performing a pulse interpolation calculation.

a temperature measurement accuracy of ±2. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover (Cpsp) to less than ±0. the required pressure measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in pressure. 7.5°F would be required. For determination of corrections for the thermal expansion of the process liquid at the prover (Ctlp). pressure variations have a much lower relative impact than temperature on both the prover steel and process fluid density. to correct for the thermal expansion of the prover steel. The requirements for temperature measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly.01%. It is commonly required that the pressure measurement be accurate to ±3 psi (±0. to correct for the influence of pressure on the prover volume.1°F (0. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. These devices generally use a thermowell inserted in the process fluid. A thermometer is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. The two most common pressure measurement devices used for proving are diaphragm pressure transducers and bourdon tube pressure gauges. An RTD or similar device is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. A pressure gauge is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. A pressure transducer is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. In general.2 bar). The two most common means of measuring temperature are RTDs and precision thermometers.4 Pressure Measurement Device Pressure measurement is required for closedvessel volumetric tank provers and pipe provers.01%. the required temperature measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in temperature. Experience with the specific process fluid will be necessary to establish requirements for pressure measurement precision. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover (Ctsp) to less than ±0. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. Temperature measurement might also be required to correct for the influence of temperature variations on the density of the process fluid.5 °F (±0.Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7 7. The thermometer resolution should be no greater than ±0.25 °C). A heat conductive fluid is placed inside the thermowell to transfer heat to the RTD or thermometer. a pressure measurement accuracy of ±100 psi would be required. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 63 . For determination of corrections for the pressure effect on the process liquid at the prover (Cplp). The requirements for pressure measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor. It may also be necessary to correct for the influence of pressure variations on the density of the process fluid.3 Temperature Measurement Device Temperature measurement is required for volumetric tank and pipe provers.05 °C) is used when proving meters. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. Generally. a thermometer with a resolution of 0.

The on-line density devices have the advantages of providing a continuous output signal that represents the actual flowing density.0001 g/cc for NiSpanC.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7. • Pycnometer. can be used. • Hydrometer.0005 g/cc for stainless steel.0001 g/cc.001 g/cc. accurate to ±0.5 Density Measurement Device If the meter is configured for mass measurement. correction factors would then be required to correct the density back to the process conditions. it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. and can be monitored while the meter is being proved. • On-line density from a separate density meter mounted at the prover. • On-line density from the Coriolis meter. accurate to ±0. accurate to ±0. a means is required for determining the density of the product at the prover. or some other sampling method. The hydrometer technique requires a fluid sample to be taken from the process pipeline. Because the product volume will change with changing temperature and pressure. • Sample and laboratory density determination. with an accuracy of ±0. Also. which will be used specifically for density measurement. or some other sampling method. if the sample contains light-ends and is not properly sealed. It is difficult to obtain samples that will represent the actual fluid density during the proving runs. Of the methods described above. this device will generally require a slipstream to be pulled from the process pipeline.) 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. When performing on-line density measurements. and a volumetric prover is used. an on-line density meter made of NiSpanC.0005 g/cc. Accuracy depends on instrument accuracy and equation accuracy. Hydrometers generally do not have sufficient accuracy to be used for mass to volume proving applications. The device being used for determining density should have an accuracy of at least ±0.0001 g/cc. For the highest precision. the calculation method for well defined products.0001 g/cc. This may create errors in the density determination. The following methods are available to determine the process fluid density: • Calculation of density from pressure and temperature measurements.0005 g/cc. and the on-line density determination devices are the most practical. or additional temperature and pressure corrections will be required. All of the other methods require taking a fluid sample and determining the density of the sample. ±0. accurate to ±0. Proper sampling practices are vital to ensure the sample is representative of the process fluid. 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. which raises concerns about proper sampling technique. can be used. 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. However. 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. 64 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . In addition it may be difficult to maintain the sample at the same temperature and pressure as the process fluid in the pipeline. accurate to ±0.

The pycnometer has a known volume. on manual proving systems. the fluid density can be determined by dividing the fluid mass by the pycnometer volume.6 Density Averaging Device If the actual fluid density does not remain relatively constant during meter proving. the density measurement of this device must be proved. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 65 . Pycnometers should be returned to the manufacturer and recertified at least once every two years. If a flow computer is being used. because the sample is collected under pressure. to provide an average density during each proving run. Refer to Section 11. This is a fairly specialized device. for more details on determining the meter’s density factor using a pycnometer. A container to collect the sample will also be required. Alternatively. A sampling port or sampling loop will be required to get a representative fluid sample. because the meter measures the entire fluid stream. which are difficult to clean out of the vessel. However. pycnometers are impractical for many fluids.Proving Instrumentation Requirements Density Averaging Device 7 Using the density indication from the Coriolis meter that is being proved eliminates sampling concerns.7 Density Proving Device If an on-line density measurement device is being used. and comparing it to the meter reading. 7.0005 g/cc is available with ELITE sensors and with D600 sensors when used with RFT9739 transmitters. This amount of density variation will consume a significant portion of the general repeatability requirement of ±0. The averaging of density should be triggered by the prover detectors. such as crude oil. 7.05%. then a density averaging device may be required. one of the analog outputs. If the total density variation caused by changes in temperature. A density accuracy of ±0. The calibration of the density meter is verified every time the Coriolis meter is proved. Pycnometers are primarily used for light-end hydrocarbons. from the display of a Micro Motion density peripheral device. pressure.4. page 146. a separate density averaging device may be required.0002 g/cc. or from the digital value viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. an averaged density should be used for the proving. but should be available from companies that manufacture prover counters. density averaging will be fairly easy to accomplish. or product composition exceeds 0. the density meter’s calibration can be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. The density reading from a Coriolis meter can be obtained from the digital output. and by weighing the fluid-filled pycnometer. A density factor for the density meter is obtained by determining the density of a fluid sample. 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. Pressure compensation of the density may be required if pressure does not remain constant (refer to page 229). and sampling cylinders are used for crude oil. However.

66 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 69 . . . . Coriolis Master Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Proving Runs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration for Repeatable Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . Pulse Output Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . . . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . Proving Duration for Repeatable Output. Number of Proving Runs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards. . . . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . . . . . . . . Damping Factor Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Fluid Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Output Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Calculation . . Required Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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. . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Duration Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flow Rate Proving Devices 8 8. . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Meters . . . . . . . . Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement Precautions . Master Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accumulating Enough Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Fluid Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommended Proving Duration. . .

. Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down . . Average meter factors for multiple proving runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small volume prover. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 70 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . Conventional pipe prover . . . . . . Volumetric tank proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Typical sensor operating frequencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gravimetric proving with tanker truck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outlet piping design for filling tank provers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric proving against a storage tank . . . . . . . . . .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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Double-chronometry pulse interpolation . . . . . 72 72 76 77 78 79 85 92 93 102 105 112 Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure 71 Buoyancy correction factors . . Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter Coriolis master meter proving.

However. Volumetric transfer standards or master meters 6. primarily related to handling the fluid in the tank. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 71 . Gravimetric tank proving 2. Therefore. Mass (Coriolis) master meters Table 8-1 indicates the traceability of the various proving methods back to a fundamental measure. which is filled and then taken to a truck scale. page 72). 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. or a tanker truck (see Figure 8-1b). Small volume (Compact) provers 5.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices The proving methods listed below are discussed in this section. A gravimetric proving system employs a tank placed on a weigh scale (see Figure 8-1a. small volume provers and transfer standards are described in Section 3. Volumetric tank proving 3. If the meter is being used to measure mass. the only means currently available for accomplishing this is with some type of weigh tank. If the meter is being used for volume measurement. There are disadvantages in using a weigh tank. Gravimetric proving is the preferred method of proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement. Proving procedures for conventional pipe provers. the volume will be correct. Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure. the simplest approach is to prove the meter’s volume measurement directly against a volumetric prover. Table 8-1. from the most preferred method to the least preferred method. based in part on which have the most uncertainty associated with them. Conventional pipe provers 4. but pipe provers are volumetric devices. if the mass flow and density calibrations are proved. In-line proving devices such as pipe provers would be preferred from a product handling perspective. page 15. These methods are listed in order. The volume measurement is calculated from the independent mass flow and density measurements. the prover volume measurement must be converted to mass by determining the density of the process fluid in the prover. Because a Coriolis meter is capable of being configured for mass or volume measurement. there are more options available for proving these devices than for turbine or PD meters. 1.1 Gravimetric Tank Proving Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement.

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

0007 1. and the buoyant force is inherently calibrated out.0014 1.2 1.0023 at sea level. To compensate for this effect.0 0. The scale is calibrated with the metal weights. (Eq. Fluid Density g/cc 2.5 1.052 0.0009 1. when calibrating the scale.0007 1.0019 1. 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. ρ fluid Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 73 .185 0.105 0.056 0. but being used to measure a fluid with significantly different density than the weights. the fluid being displaced is air. and the weights. Return line must be isolated so as not to affect the scale reading The only instrumentation required is a display or pulse counting device. Equation 8-2 is used to determine buoyancy.119 0.8 1.072 0. The 100 lbs of water is subject to a much larger upward buoyant force than the 100 lb weight.9 0. Essentially. Table 8-2. the process fluid. 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. Correction % 0. or (2) the process fluid being measured.060 0. (Eq.0006 1.7 1.226 Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor for gravimetric proving is determined from Equation 8-1. Therefore. no correction would be required.065 0.135 0.071 0.0016 1.0012 1.0009 1. 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.045 0.7 0.6 1.0 1. and the object displacing the air is either (1) the metal weight. a buoyancy correction factor (Fb) is applied to the scale’s reading.0005 1. The difference is important when a product of different density is weighed.0005 1.5 Note: All values Buoyancy Correction Factor. Buoyancy Correction Buoyancy correction is necessary to account for the scale being calibrated with metal weights. For gravimetric proving.3 1. resulting in the scale registering a lower reading for the water than its actual mass. when proving the Coriolis meter. the buoyancy correction is a calculation that employs the ratios of the densities of air.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).157 0.9 1. 8-2) ρ air 1 – ---------------- ρ weight Fb = ------------------------------ρ air 1 – -----------. Buoyancy correction factors.0011 1. Fb 1.094 0. page 181 (Appendix B).0008 1.0005 1. and Table 8-2 presents calculated buoyancy correction values for a range of fluid densities at sea level. If the scale were only being used to measure items of the same density as the metal weight. the scale reading is adjusted to match the weight of the certified weights.4 1.085 0. can be used for recording data and performing the gravimetric proving calculations.1 1. for determining the quantity of fluid measured by the meter.0006 1.6 0. The displacement of fluid results in the fluid exerting an upward buoyant force on the object. A 100 lb weight displaces a much smaller volume than 100 lbs of water.048 0.8 0.

for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. This component will generally have less than ±0.025% or better accuracy should be the target. Scale Resolution Batch Size = -----------------------------------------------0.01% uncertainty.0 g/cc. page 71. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical gravimetric prover. Eprover res = The scale uncertainty due to resolution is determined from the following equation: Scale Resolution E prover res = -----------------------------------------------. they are calibrated against certified weights. it can be seen that this factor is significant for products of densities less than 1. as indicated in Table 8-1.5. 74 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .01% over the entire calibration range. The following calculation can be used to determine the appropriate batch size. over the range of weight used for calibration. (Eq. and can result in measurement errors of 0.1% and greater. If truck scales are used. which are a fundamental measurement standard. the total uncertainty can then be determined as follows: E = ( ± 0. Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty Gravimetric provers are a primary standard because. 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. The uncertainty can be improved by increasing the batch size or improving the scale resolution. The scale should agree with the calibration weights to within ±0. Eprover cal = The uncertainty from the scale calibration is determined from the measured or accepted deviation between the scale reading and the weights. Total error is calculated using Equation 8-3.025% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. Using Equation 8-3. they may not have sufficient resolution to warrant the additional calculations required to correct for buoyancy.* 100 Batch Size This component is minimized by increasing the size of the test batch. page 73. This will have a noticeable impact in custody transfer applications. page 125.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01%.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving From Table 8-2.00025 Ebuoy = The uncertainty due to the buoyancy correction will depend on the accuracy of the densities used to determine the buoyancy correction factor. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9.030% The scale resolution is the predominant influence on the calculated uncertainty. A batch size large enough to result in ±0.

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

Some type of cover or floating interface between the process fluid and the atmosphere may be necessary. This can be accomplished by always draining the piping downstream of the shutoff valve into the weigh tank. or by creating a gooseneck design (see Figure 8-3) that guarantees the level inside the piping is always consistent. Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run Care must be exercised to ensure the process fluid does not evaporate from the system. the flow ramps down to zero flow. It is important that the ramp-up and rampdown intervals are relatively short in relation to the batch duration. to ensure the proving results are representative of the meter’s performance under normal operating conditions. pressure and flow rate. Batch Size Recommendation From the previous discussion. To initiate a proving. temperature.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. 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 . Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down. Generally. The piping to the weigh tank must be designed to ensure the same amount of fluid stays in the pipe on every test batch. To obtain good proving results the following conditions should be Figure 8-2. Illustrated is the effect on flow rate of the valve opening and closing on the fluid flow rate. The piping must be leak free. Consistent Batch Size When designing the gravimetric tank proving system. In addition. When the batch is stopped. 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. and (2) the time required to open and close the valves to achieve the desired flow rate. This results in a slight measurement error at the start and at the end of the batch. This process is illustrated in Figure 8-2. flow will not be registered below the low-flow cutoff value. a valve is opened and the flow rate through the meter has to ramp up to the desired operating rate. there are two factors that need to be addressed in order to determine the required batch size: (1) the scale resolution. The influence of the meter’s zero will have a greater impact during the ramp-up and ramp-down periods. viscosity. 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 error is insignificant because the quantity of fluid missed while in the lowflow cutoff range is very small compared to the total batch size. Excessive evaporation could result in measurement errors.

Transmitter applied. Outlet piping design for filling tank provers. • The time to complete a batch should be no less than 1 minute. it is likely the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. the problem generally lies with the prover system. For Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. No fewer than three test batches should be performed.025%. If both meters yield the same type of performance. which is prone to inconsistent draining. be evaluated. 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 Flow Sensor Acceptable This piping design is acceptable. On/off valve Transmitter Flow On/off valve Sensor Recommended This piping design is recommended because head pressure improves consistency of interface. Flow Sensor On/off valve Avoid Avoid this piping design. Repeatability As stated previously. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. If this repeatability specification cannot be met.05% (±0. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. but may still produce inconsistent batches if head pressure is not sufficient to keep pipe full of process fluid. sources of the non-repeatability need to Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 77 .025%) at a single set of operating conditions (flow rate. temperature.Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-3. pressure and composition). One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. 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.

as illustrated in Figure 8-5. This technique requires tank gauging and strapping. However. time after flow through the meter has been stopped. Flow Sensor On/off valve Volumetric tank prover Transmitter 78 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . When performing volumetric tank proving. and is generally not precise enough to verify the accuracy of the meter for custody transfer. Volumetric tank proving. in a similar fashion as for a gravimetric prover. The larger the damping factor. However.7 psia. Product flows through the meter into the calibrated volume standard. there is no effect on the accuracy of the total flow indication.8 damping value. refer to Section 10. there are significant concerns and limitation of diverting fluid from the pipeline into the prover tank: Figure 8-4. fluid flows through the meter and is diverted from the pipeline into the volumetric tank prover. page 131. In some cases it is preferable to reconcile the meter readings against large volumetric storage vessels. typically standard conditions of 60°F and 14. It is common to see the pulse counting device continue to register flow for a short period of 8. a gravimetric proving system used for field applications employs a batching method instead of an on-the-fly measurement. the longer it will take for the flow output from the transmitter to settle to a zero-flow indication. which provides a more stable flow indication from the meter during normal operation than a lower damping value. Damping Factor Recommendation Generally.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving troubleshooting information. as the transmitter outputs the remaining flow total. as illustrated in Figure 8-4. 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. As discussed for gravimetric proving. For gravimetric proving applications the recommendation is to use the factory default 0. it can be used to determine gross errors (on the order of 1% or greater) in the meter measurement.2 Volumetric Tank Proving A volumetric tank prover consists of a vessel whose volume has been precisely calibrated at a known temperature and pressure.

the product temperature in the vessel must be measured to correct the volume of the vessel for thermal expansion. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by the meter • Precision thermometer or RTD • Pressure gauge or transducer (optional. thermowell. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. Volumetric proving against a storage tank. If the meter is configured for volumetric measurement. leveling equipment.1.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-5. which are used to measure products under pressure. • What should be done with the fluid once it is in the tank? Should it be disposed of. 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. The site gauge meniscus should always be read from the same angle to ensure consistency in the measurement. A prover tank leveling system is generally required to ensure consistent readings from the site gauge used in determining the prover volume. prior to reading the following details about volumetric tank provers. site gauge. 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. If a vapor recovery system is used. 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. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-5. page 22. which can lead to measurement errors. and Section 3. Sealed volumetric provers. In addition. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. Flow Sensor Transmitter Storage tank • Volatile products can evaporate during the transfer process.2. also require pressure measurement to correct the prover volume for pressure expansion. 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. can the product being removed from the system be accounted for? • Volatile products escaping to the atmosphere raise environmental issues. page 17. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for volumetric tank proving: • Volumetric tank. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 79 .

8-5) MF m BPV * Ctsp * C psp * ρ p = ---------------------------------------------------------M meter essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. Proving form B-3. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation. Therefore. where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The pressure correction Cpsp is required only for closed tank provers. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical volumetric tank prover. there is no specific recommendation available.5. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. (Eq. where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. these factors are not required. becomes a tertiary standard. most volumetric tank provers are calibrated against another reference volumetric tank standard. 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. known as a volumetric field-standard test measure. against fluid mass and density. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. which provides a common base for comparison. however. Ctlm . page 178 (Appendix B).2 °F and 5 psig is required.* --------------------------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. For products such as crude oil. it may be helpful to refer to Section 9.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving (Eq. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are 80 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .Cplp . Proving form A-3. For products such as LPG and NGL. page 168 (Appendix A). and Cplm ) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. The volumetric field-standard test measure is normally calibrated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). a volumetric tank prover. page 125. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. Typically. 8-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp C tlp * C plp MFv = --------------------------------------------. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method.

01%.03% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.02%. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 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 ±0.02% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 81 . an uncertainty of ±0. Using the values presented above.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3).4. Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the volumetric tank prover should be within ±0. and should not exceed ±0. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.3 and 7. page 63. because the majority of volumetric tank provers are not closed pressure vessels. (Eq. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to the resolution of the graduations of the site gauge on the prover neck should not exceed ±0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. 8-8) Density Uncertainty (g/cc) E density (%) = ± ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------.0125% ) + ( ± 0. An uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc can be obtained.8 g/cc. Only the temperature correction is used in the analysis shown below.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. * 100 Process Fluid Density (g/cc) where Esteel = Two steel correction factors may need to be applied: (1) Ctsp.4 Tank Provers. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-7) using Equation 8-8.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 8-7.005%. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. At best. and (2) Cpsp.04% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. (Eq.073%.

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. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. page 81. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. page 80.8 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. However. or the tables could be misapplied. 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 . which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. are: • Ensuring the tank volume is not changed by dents. From Equation 8-6. page 80. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. If the liquid correction factors are used. For this analysis. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. bulging. as shown in Equation 8-6. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions might be required.01% ) + ( ± 0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.01%. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.02% ) + ( ± 0. the errors can be significant. which introduces a degree of error. these factors may not even be applied. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which must be considered when performing a volumetric tank proving. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. Using the values presented above. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. (Eq.03% ) + ( ± 0.039% Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving.

or deposits that build up on the interior of the prover will affect the measured volume. The uncertainty due to site gauge resolution should be no greater than ±0.025%). and is helpful in reducing evaporation. If the tank becomes dented or deformed. Proper leveling of the tank and consistency in reading the meniscus are important considerations. Reinforcing bands are applied to the exterior of the tank. the interior of the tank should be inspected. and cannot be varied as it can with a gravimetric prover. Site Gauge Resolution Versus Tank Size Having the correct ratio of site gauge resolution to tank volume is critical to ensure adequate accuracy. the tank should be sized to allow a batch of no less than 1 minute in duration. and cleaned with an appropriate solvent if necessary. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. and the piping used to fill the proving tank must consistently contain the same amount of fluid for every proving run. Before a proving is performed. Repeatability As stated previously. the size of the batch is determined by the size of the tank. The prover’s restricted neck minimizes the surface area of the air/fluid interface. 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. If both meters yield the same type of performance. Additional vapor reduction means may be needed. it is important that the ramp-up and ramp-down intervals are relatively short in relation to the batch duration. the problem generally lies with the prover.02%.02% or less.05% (±0. As stated previously. It is important to ensure the same amount of product that goes through the meter ends up in the proving tank.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. In addition. and the bottom is usually concave. The piping must be leak free. Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run Care must be exercised to ensure the process fluid does not evaporate from the system. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. The volume of the prover should be verified routinely to ensure measurement errors are not being introduced into the proving results. the tank should have a resolution uncertainty of ±0. No fewer than three test batches should be performed. Proving tanks are generally constructed to minimize tank deformation. to ensure the proving results are representative of the meter’s performance under normal operating conditions. Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 83 . If one of the meters exhibits Batch Duration Versus RampUp/Ramp-Down Times This concern is the same as for gravimetric proving (page 76). rust. it will need to have a new waterdraw performed. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Excessive evaporation could result in measurement errors. Consistent Batch Size Again. Batch Size Recommendation For volumetric tank provers. Any foreign material. this concern is relevant to any tank proving system (page 76). As stated previously.

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

the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. The equations used are the same as those used for volumetric tank provers.1.2.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Figure 8-6. 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. 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. the product temperature in the prover must be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow • The following additional instrumentation is required: • Pulse counting device. page 86. prior to reading the following details about conventional pipe provers. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. In addition. 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. 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. and Section 3. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. Flow Connection valves Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 85 . Conventional pipe prover. page 22. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. A pressure measurement is also required for correcting for the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover. page 17. • Conventional pipe prover. thermowell.

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. page 125. 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. (Eq.Cplp . the pipe prover is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions.2°F and 5 psig is required. there is no specific recommendation available. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical conventional pipe prover. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method.5. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. can be used for recording data and performing the calculations for conventional pipe provers. Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor for proving with a conventional pipe prover is determined from Equation 8-11.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover (Eq. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. 86 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . For products such as LPG and NGL. For products such as crude oil. Therefore. Proving form A-1. page 166 (see Appendix A). 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. Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty The volume of the prover loop is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures. page 176 (Appendix B). which provides a common base for comparison.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . Ctlm . these factors are not required. however. 8-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MFv = ---------------------------------------------. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation.

074%.03% ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique.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. Per API MPMS 4. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 87 .0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-12) using Equation 88.01%.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). (Eq. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc can be obtained.3 and 7. 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 ±0.02% of the volume between the detectors. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10.2 Conventional Pipe Provers.041% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.8 g/cc.01%. An uncertainty of ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. page 81.0125% ) + 2* ( ± 0. Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. and should not exceed ±0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0. The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover ball) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. or ±0. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. At best.000 pulses.02% ) + ( ± 0. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.005%.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. and (2) Cpsp. Eprover cal = Eprover res = Ecounter res= Edensity = Esteel = Using the values presented above. beginning on page 63.4. an uncertainty of ±0.

From Equation 8-11. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. except the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.01% ) + ( ± 0. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. 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. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. page 86.041% 88 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. page 87. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. which introduces a degree of error. All of the terms in Equation 8-13 are the same as those in Equation 8-12. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. page 86.8 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. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01% ) + 2* ( ±0. For this analysis. (Eq. However. or the tables could be misapplied.01%. the errors can be significant. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-11. these factors may not even be applied.03% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. Using the values presented above. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. If the liquid correction factors are used. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter.02% ) + ( ± 0.

care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. Most provers are equipped with some means for checking valving leaks. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. the proving run should last long enough to accumulate at least 10. page 53.000 pulses. 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.000 pulses from the meter.8. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter. To minimize such errors. Consequently. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the ball and accumulating pulses from the meter. From a technical perspective. The problem is that launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. Unidirectional provers require a new waterdraw any time the detectors are removed. Leakage past the ball can be prevented by making sure the ball is properly filled to slightly exceed the internal diameter of the prover. if there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. detector switches are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 89 . Failure of a detector switch is generally easy to diagnose. 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.4. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. 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 results will be in error. If a detector switch is replaced. For enough pulses to be accumulated. because there will usually be severe measurement errors. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate.3 (see K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination. by employing a double block and bleed valve for diverting fluid from the main pipeline into the prover. and the prover must be of suitable volume to allow a proving run that is long enough. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. page 52). the meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. 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. The switches can become worn or damaged.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. as discussed in Section 6. 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. a waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a prover detector switch.01%. (See Section 6. In bi-directional provers. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. The ball should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure there is no severe scratching or scoring of the prover ball. 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.

the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. If the prover experiences erosion or corrosion. then determine repeatability between the average meter 90 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If the prover is subjected to harsh process fluids. Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover Any variation in the volume of the prover will impact the accuracy of the meter factor.025%). the process fluid should be continuously circulated through the prover. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Repeatability As stated previously. An additional benefit of coatings is they can reduce the friction between the ball and the prover.05% (±0. 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. the prover can be coated with suitable materials (such as epoxies. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. As the prover size is increased there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. factors. If both meters yield the same type of performance. The response time of the meter frequency output depends on the damping factor set in the transmitter. which requires knowledge about the operating flow rates.4 (see Number of Proving Passes/Runs. 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. Routine recalibration of the prover will minimize these errors. Damping Factor Recommendation Although damping considerations are not significant for tank proving methods. the maximum and minimum allowable velocities and the meter’s K-factor.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover recommended damping factor is 0. Launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. page 101). Proving runs should not begin until the prover temperature has stabilized. they are a concern with on-the-fly field provers.). to minimize or eliminate these problems.2 Conventional Pipe Provers for details on sizing the prover volume. Number of Proving Runs No fewer than five proving runs should be performed. To expedite this process. its internal volume will change. it may be necessary to group individual proving runs and average them.1. the problem generally lies with the prover. resulting in meter factor errors.67 seconds. This technique is common for small volume provers and is discussed in detail in Section 8. which requires a prerun duration of at least 0. If the meter’s frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate during the prerun period. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. where the prover may be relatively small. Teflon®. etc. Prover Size Recommendation Sizing a prover is a fairly involved task. which is beneficial if the process fluid has poor lubricating properties. It might be necessary to insulate the prover piping to minimize ambient influences. In some instances. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. Refer to API MPMS 4.

it might be necessary to use a smaller damping factor.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. a conventional pipe prover is large enough that the prerun will be 4 seconds long. which has an optical “flag” mounted on it. The damping factor should not be set any higher than 0.8. pulses from the meter being calibrated are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 91 . A metal rod. and a damping factor of 0. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. because the flow rate indication from the meter varies significantly.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 The factory default setting is a 0.1. The volume of an SVP is on the order of 10 to 20 times smaller than a conventional pipe prover used for comparable service. Compact Prover is a trademarked name for the small volume prover manufactured by Brooks Instruments. special precautions must be taken to ensure the validity of the proving results when using an SVP.1. except it has a significantly smaller volume. sweeping out a volume of fluid. A diagram of a typical SVP.2 seconds. Key components are the prover cylinder and piston. However.8 damping factor. An SVP is essentially the same as a pipe prover.67 seconds. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. As the piston sweeps through the cylinder volume.8 is preferred. which generally results in provings taking less time. which requires a proving duration of at least 0. The seals around the piston prevent leakage of fluid around the piston as it moves down the cylinder. The meter should be proved first with the damping factor of 0. the “flag” triggers optical measurement switches. Using the lowest damping factor of 0. a simple test can be performed. and eliminates the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. If poor repeatability is demonstrated.8. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. The flowing fluid pushes the piston downstream through the cylinder. Its small size makes the SVP particularly suitable for portable installations. the larger damping value is acceptable. Therefore. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. However.1 is usually quite conservative. If there is no change in the meter factor between the two different damping value. page 92. in this case a Brooks Compact Prover. and the prover prerun time is not known. many individuals do not like to use a low damping factor. When a proving pass is initiated. them proved again with the damping factor of 0. the poppet valve is closed pneumatically and seals against the face of the piston. Although the damping factor will have no affect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different factor. When the prover is in the standby mode or not being operated. The wide flow range allows one SVP to be used for calibrating multiple meters with significantly different flow ratings. the poppet valve.8 can be used. prerun times at the maximum rated flow of the prover can be as short as 0. the poppet valve is open and fluid flows freely through the piston assembly. and reduces the time required for the prover displacer to traverse the prover volume. When the flag triggers the first measurement switch. is presented in Figure 8-7. 8. is attached to the piston. creating a solid surface.000 pulses from the meter. and the optical detectors. and additional timing computations are required to minimize resolution problems associated with accumulating fewer than 10. The primary advantages of a small volume prover (SVP) are its small size and wide flow rate rangeability of 1000:1.4 Small Volume Prover The terms small volume prover and Compact Prover™ are often used interchangeably. Because a 0. Generally. If a damping value of 0.

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

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. To provide acceptable accuracy. an SVP is a volume measurement device. This technique uses two counters. a single where Ninterpolated = Number of interpolated pulses determined from the double chronometry calculation = Number of pulses from the Ncounter meter. Due to the small size of the prover. 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. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 mechanical switches used on a conventional pipe prover. 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 . If the prover is used in multiple locations. 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. the contents of the prover are much easier to handle than with tank provers or conventional pipe provers. (Eq. The ratio of the two times is used for determining the fractional flow measurement pulses that occurred between the prover measurement switches. one to measure the time between triggering of the measurement switches. 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. which permits small volumes to be used for meter proving. Therefore. The smaller size of an SVP makes it well suited to being mounted on a truck and moved from one location to another. 1st detector Displacer Flow tube 2nd detector Flow Calibrated volume Volume D Time A This method of pulse interpolation provides better pulse resolution. 8-14) tdetectors N interpolated = N counter * ------------------t meter or drained out of the prover and be handled in some other fashion. and may require thorough cleaning with an appropriate solvent to prevent cross-contamination of products. The calculation is performed using Equation 8-14. As with a conventional pipe prover. Double-chronometry pulse interpolation. and the other to measure the time between the leading edge of the meter measurement pulses. the SVP uses a measurement technique known as double chronometry pulse interpolation. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. it will generally have to be emptied of its contents between provings. If the meter is configured for volume measurement. Double chronometry pulse interpolation is presented in Figure 8-8.

1. (Eq. a pressure measurement is required for correcting the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover. 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 equations used are the same as those used for conventional pipe and volumetric tank provers. 8-16) N interpolated M meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. thermowell. The meter mass is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. The product temperature in the prover must also be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. (2) a high-resolution crystal oscillator (>100. 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. In addition.000 Hz) for timing measurements. consisting of (1) a pulse counting device. and the duration of the individual proving passes. Proving form B-2. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. A printer is required to produce the report. 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. (Eq. and Section 3. instead of the total meter pulses. prior to reading the following details about small volume provers. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Proving electronics. which contains all of the required proving information.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. page 22.2. 94 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. as shown in Equation 8-16. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor is determined from Equation 8-15. not the individual proving passes. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. page 177 (Appendix B). This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. page 17. The requirements for density averaging will obviously depend on the stability of the process fluid density.

these factors are not required. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. (Eq.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-17. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. not the individual proving passes. there is no specific recommendation available. For products such as crude oil. Cplp . page 167 (see Appendix A). If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. Therefore. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical SVP. Small Volume Prover Uncertainty The volume of the prover cylinder is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures. page 125. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 95 . The meter volume is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. which contains all of the required proving information. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. A printer is required to produce the report. 8-17) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MF v = --------------------------------------------. as shown in Equation 8-18. which provides a common base for comparison. 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. Ctlm . 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. however.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter= Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid.5. Proving form A-2. 8-18) N interpolated Q meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2.2°F and 5 psig is required. the SVP is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. (Eq. There are two differences between this calculation and the one used for conventional pipe provers: 1. instead of the total meter pulses. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method.

If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.3 and 7. the overall proving uncertainty for a small volume prover is: E = ( ± 0. An uncertainty of ±0. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. and should not exceed ±0. 96 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.038% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.0001 g/cc can be obtained. However. (Eq.4 on page 63.03% ) + ( ± 0.072%. page 81.8 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 8-19.0125% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. = Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0. Ecounter res = The uncertainty due to the pulse counter and pulse interpolation calculations should not exceed ±0.01% of the volume between the detectors. Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.01%.8 g/cc. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-19) using Equation 88. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover piston) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.3 Small Volume Provers.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. 105-3). Esteel Using the values presented above. and (2) Cpsp. At best.01% Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP.01% ) + ( ± 0. an uncertainty of ±0.005%. 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.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0.03% (NIST Handbook.

From Equation 8-17.01% ) + ( ± 0. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. or the tables could be misapplied.01% ) + ( ± 0.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. these factors may not even be applied. This is due to the smaller prover volume. which will introduces a degree of error. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. page 95. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant.01% ) + 2 * ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. A density measurement is not needed for this case. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 97 . The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. 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. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11.037% Although the uncertainty calculated for a small volume prover is less than for a conventional pipe prover. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. (Eq. the errors can be significant.03% ) + ( ± 0. page 96. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. However. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. If the liquid correction factors are used. page 95. Using the values presented above the overall proving uncertainty for an SVP is: E = ( ± 0. However. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-17. 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. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP. All of the terms in Equation 8-20 are the same as those in Equation 8-19. the pass-to-pass proving results obtained from a small volume prover are typically not as repeatable. For this analysis. this calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers.01%. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors.

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. which provides a means for checking whether any flow is bypassing the prover. If the number of pulses accumulated during a proving run is less than 1. to minimize variations in the flag position relative to the detector switches. launching the prover piston. Therefore.01%. Even though pulse interpolation is used. The flag is commonly mounted on a rod made of a steel. A waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a detector switch. the switches should be checked to make sure they have not become loose and shifted their position. Wear of the seals will be greater with process fluids that have poor lubricating qualities. so more frequent inspection for leaks is warranted. If the rod that holds the measurement detectors moves more than the amount prescribed by the manufacturer. If the proving results seem inconsistent with previous results. Because pulse interpolation is used. which corresponds to a period of 1.000.025 seconds to obtain ±0. If a detector switch is replaced. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. the proving repeatability will be 98 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .01% resolution uncertainty.25 microseconds. the prime sources of uncertainty are the reference period of the clock and the time period used to accumulate pulses from the meter. 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. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. The typical optical detector switch is extremely precise. and applying sufficient actuator pressure. the time period required for pulse accumulation is only 0. The time period for pulse accumulation must be at least 20. The prover piston seals can be checked for leaks by blocking the prover in.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Precautions Key items that impact the accuracy of the proving. Any misalignment between switches will result in measurement errors.000 Hz. to improve lubricity. which must be considered when using a small volume prover. The actual proving time is at least 10 times greater than this value. For the Brooks Compact Prover. Accumulating Enough Pulses From the uncertainty analysis performed in the previous section. and probably require replacement. the repeatability of the proving will be impacted by the number of pulses accumulated from the meter. the piston seals are suspect. Any leakage past the prover seals will result in measurement errors. It may be desirable to coat the walls of the proving cylinder with an appropriate epoxy-based compound or baked-on phenolic.000 times greater than the reference period of the clock in order to provide sufficient accuracy. which has a very low coefficient of thermal expansion. the uncertainty due to the pulse resolution should be less than ±0. the clock frequency is 800.

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

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

which repeat within 0. Table 8-4. lists maximum flow rates for Brooks Compact Provers to provide compatibility to MMI Coriolis meters.05%. gal (liters) 5 (20) 10 (40) 15 (60) 30 (120) 65 (250) 100 (400) 170 (650) Maximum flow rate. By using a larger prover. The prerun duration at the maximum flow rating of the Compact Prover is on the order of 0. page 101. the maximum recommended flow rate for a Brooks Compact prover is approximately four times less than the prover specification. To clarify terminology used in this discussion: a proving pass is equal to one complete trip of the prover piston. gpm (m³/h) 150 (35) 300 (70) 450 (105) 900 (210) 1940 (450) 3640 (850) 5075 (1150) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 101 . but can be a single proving pass. there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. Prover Description 8" 12" Midi 12" Std 18" 24" 34" 40" Volume. is most commonly used. five proving round trips.17 seconds. 8-21) Proving Flow Rate (units/minute ) ≤ 30 * Prover Volume (units) and for determining the minimum recommended SVP size (given the flow rate): (Eq. Table 8-4. are used to prove a meter with a conventional prover. due to the smaller quantity of liquid typically measured with an SVP. Repeatability is used as an indication of whether the meter and proving system are operating properly. for determining the maximum flow rate (given the SVP size): (Eq. Special methods for defining the required number of proving runs for SVPs have been developed and are presented in API MPMS 4. The repeatability specification is used as the determinant in ensuring a sufficient number of proving runs are performed to provide the correct meter factor.3 Small Volume Provers.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Thus. Number of Proving Passes/Runs Generally. Method 3 in Appendix B. Appendix B. It is recommended to use the largest size Compact Prover available when proving Coriolis meters. but is also used to provide confidence in the proving results. However. 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. a proving run is generally a group of passes averaged together. 8-22) Prover Volume (units) ≥ 0.033 * Proving Flow Rate (units/minute) Note that “units” can be any volumetric unit of measure. flowmeters will generally exhibit unacceptable repeatability when proved with small volume provers using five individual proving trips.

1. The same procedure was used for the other sets of data producing: • • • • • 20 runs of 5 passes. At least two runs are needed to calculate repeatability. The repeatability of meter factors for all of the runs should then fall within the 0.0004 1.9998 0. However.0008 1. as described by Method 3. and 4 runs of 25 passes.05% tolerance. using 10 passes per run results in a repeatability well within 0. Appendix B) Method 3 involves accumulating individual prover passes to form a group (run).9992 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 100 Passes per run 102 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Each data point is the average meter factor for the three passes. the number of proving passes required for each proving application will depend on a number of variables: Figure 8-9. using Equation 9-10. 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. Usually. 5 runs of 20 passes. 10 runs of 10 passes. 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). Increasing the number of passes per run results in improved repeatability (D300/12” Compact Prover 700 lb/min). A series of runs. For turbine and PD meters 5 runs of 3 passes each is most commonly used. each consisting of a specified number of passes. are performed.0002 1 0.9996 0.3. how many proving passes are required for each run for Coriolis meters? The technique of grouping proving passes into runs. three or five runs are used. for this particular example. At the far left of the graph is the data for one pass per run.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Method 3 (from API MPMS 4. at 700 lb/min. The 100 prover passes were divided into 33 consecutive runs of three passes each. is illustrated in Figure 8-9. Meter factors are then determined for each run. 6 runs of 15 passes.9994 0. These data points represent the individual meter factors for each of the 100 prover passes. In the next set of data there are three passes in each run.05%. Increasing the number of passes in each group decreases the variation between the group meter factors. The average of all of the runs then becomes the meter factor to be used for inventory calculation. and then determine an average meter factor for the run. Average meter factors for multiple proving runs. Coriolis Meter Number of Passes The question that remains is. page 124. The number of passes per run should not exceed 20.0006 Average meter factor 1. It can be seen that.

Due to the small size of an SVP and the subsequent reduction in the proving prerun time. When using an SVP.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Table 8-5. 3 to 5 passes per run will usually be acceptable.13 0.05% (±0. a damping factor of 0.025%). Passes per Run 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 Repeatability (%) 0. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. Using the damping factor of 0. Repeatability versus number of passes per run.1 reduces the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. 15 to 20 passes per run may be required. If this repeatability specification cannot be met.033 0. If both meters yield the same type of performance. even with 20 passes per prover run. the problem generally lies with the prover.1 is recommended.064 0. page 53. This method requires an initial group of 30 proving runs of 1 pass each to be conducted. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. damping concerns are far more important for an SVP than for a conventional pipe prover. At flow rates of 75% or greater of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. Repeatability As stated previously. An alternative method for determining the number of passes required for a particular metering application is presented in Appendix I. An equation is then used to calculate the number of passes needed. and in detail in Section 6. • • • • • 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. page 245. 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.021 0. Results from Figure 8-9. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter.4.023 0. At flow rates of 50% or less of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. 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). the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. sources of the non-repeatability need to be Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 103 .052 0.016 evaluated.

For example. the proving application will have to be evaluated to determine if a larger damping factor can be used. Master meters are typically used in situations where provers are not available. Transfer standard meters are used to prove Coriolis meters in applications for which the prover is undersized for the meter. If there is no change in the meter factor. One of the drawbacks of master meter proving is. the meter should first be proved with a damping factor of 0.8 instead of 0. a simple test can be performed. The test duration will generally be one minute or longer. to determine a meter factor for the transfer standard meter.1. Master Meters There is a distinction between master meters and transfer standard meters. Transfer Standard Meters Transfer standard meters must initially be proved at operating conditions against either a conventional pipe prover or small volume prover. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different damping factor. 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. Although the damping factor will have no effect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving.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. then moved to the site where it will be used to calibrate the meter being tested. a larger damping factor is only acceptable for relatively low flow rates.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. Transfer standard proving may be necessary when using an SVP. Master meters are generally calibrated in a laboratory environment.8 damping factor will need to be reassessed. temperature. A damping factor larger than 0. and their calibration usually does not reflect meter performance under actual operating conditions. over the exact same time interval. 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. In general. or cannot be installed for logistical reasons. the larger damping value is acceptable. pressure. The proving results are subject to the accuracy of the master meter and the influence of process conditions on the master meter. Any 104 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .67 seconds.8 should never be used. inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved.8.1. The primary disadvantage of using a master meter is that it is an indirect proving method. If the flow rate is increased the 0. and fluid composition. The transfer standard is used as a means to pass along the prover’s calibration to the Coriolis meter being tested. to use a damping value of 0. Therefore. master meter proving is only used when no direct proving methods are practical. or for an oversized prover. then proved again with a damping factor of 0. The meter factor that is determined for the transfer standard meter removes any inaccuracies associated with the transfer standard meter. Due to uncertainties in the master meter performance. a master meter is generally proved in one location. Dual pulse counters and a precision triggering system are required. To use a large damping factor. 8. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. and the Coriolis meter cannot be directly proved by the prover. and the prerun time is less than 0.

The volumetric meters that are used as master meters are positive displacement meters and turbine meters. To prevent slippage. Refer to Section 3. In this example. A positive displacement meter is a direct volume measurement device. volumetric flow rate is determined from the fluid velocity.000 Figure 8-10. Turbine meters are velocity measurement devices. Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter. for an overview of the applicable proving procedures. Proving Equipment and Procedures The equipment and procedures for master meter proving are essentially the same as for transfer standard proving. the term master meter will be used to describe both transfer standard meters and master meters. This technique eliminates the uncertainty associated with proving the meter at one location and moving to a different site.3. fluid viscosity and flow rate. However. which can be moved from one location to the next. page 30. For the rest of this discussion. The primary concern for positive displacement meters is slippage. which will impact the accuracy of the meter. a transfer standard meter is proved against an SVP to determine a meter factor. 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 . 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. such as accumulating 10. 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. except that a conventional or small volume prover must be used with the transfer standard meter. it is always preferable to prove the Coriolis meter directly against the prover. a flow conditioner should be used upstream of the turbine in both locations.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards 8 A transfer standard proving is illustrated in Figure 8-10. The master meter must be proved in the same fashion as any meter. and is then immediately used to prove the Coriolis meter under test. The flow conditioner and turbine meter should be fabricated into an integral meter section. Minimum pulse requirements. Turbine meters are primarily affected by variations in flow profile.

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

**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

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

because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. a meter factor for the master meter is generally not used. Proving form B-5. individual meter factors can be determined at different flow rates. the master meter is calibrated to provide an extremely linear output. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. Since Coriolis meters are very linear-flow measurement devices. corresponding as closely to a meter factor of 1. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for mass measurement. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for mass measurement. 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.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from either the Coriolis master meter or the Coriolis test meter. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for volume measurement. (Eq. • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. page 180 (Appendix B). Finally. The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal. Although temperature and pressure measurements are not required for calculation purposes. Also. (2) When the proving is initiated. An external density measurement is not required. these process measurements are useful in ensuring stable conditions at both the test meter and the master meter. Coriolis meters can measure both mass and volume. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor for master meter proving is determined from Equation 8-27. The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in ±0. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). temperature. longer proving times will improve the results. 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. To reduce the meter’s uncertainty.0000 as possible. and flow rate. The volume of fluid contained in the master meter piping is minimal. can be used for recording data and performing the proving calculations for a Coriolis master meter. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for volume measurement. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 113 . Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer.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. Instead. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter.

the Coriolis master meter will be a secondary reference to a fundamental measure. The uncertainty in the proving depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. An additional proving form. The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . 8-28) MFmaster * Q master Ctlp * C plp MFv = -----------------------------------------------. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. page 170. which is proved against a gravimetric prover. The uncertainty calculations include an additional term for the meter’s basic uncertainty specification for mass and density measurements as appropriate. the four liquid correction factors are not required. If a gravimetric prover is used. is included for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volume measurement against a coriolis master meter configured for mass measurement. can be used for recording data and performing the proving calculations for any volumetric meter. Ctlm and Cplm refer to the meter being tested. however.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-28. 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. page 169 (Appendix A). so it is not discussed in detail in this section. form A-5. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. For products such as crude oil. For products such as LPG and NGL. 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 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.Cplp .* -----------------------------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. there is no specific recommendation available. This option would not commonly be used. page 125. Ctlm . in this case the Coriolis master meter. a conventional pipe prover or SVP can be used to prove the master meter. If the master meter is configured for volume measurement. 114 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. The following analysis represents the error associated with a Coriolis master meter. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. (Eq. 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.5.2°F and 5 psig is required. including a Coriolis master meter configured for volume measurement. which provides a common base for comparison. Because the Coriolis master meter will generally be calibrated under conditions other than the actual operating conditions. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9.

Ecounter res= This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the test meter. Eprover cal = The uncertainty due to this component will be very subjective. 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. At least 10. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 115 .025% for all of the proving runs conducted. because of the larger meter uncertainty component.01%.) The overall proving uncertainty when using a Coriolis master meter would be on the order of: E = ( ± 0.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. (Eq.000 pulses. page 74.10% is used. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the master meter’s mass flow measurement. However. (Refer to Section E.01%. and impact on uncertainty.000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter.10% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. These meter factors should be documented and applied properly when proving meters in the field with the master meter. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. a value of ±0.000 pulses. for master meter zero consideration. this can be improved by improving the ratio of scale resolution to proving batch size. other than as a transfer standard. different meter factors may have to be used for different flow rates.025 ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. The master meter should be repeatable to within ±0. page 202. a value of ±0. or ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. The value of ±0. and is determined by how closely the master meter agrees with the gravimetric prover when it is calibrated. Eprover res = This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above.01% ) + ( ± 0. For ELITE meters. From Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty. In order to meet this recommendation. The meter’s zero stability must be taken into account. A minimum of two runs should be conducted at each flow rate when calibrating the master meter. or ±0. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion.10% is only applicable in the meter’s upper flow range.108% The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods.9. as explained previously.030% ) + ( ± 0.

which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the Coriolis master meter and the Coriolis test meter. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. page 114.025 ) + ( ± 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.0625%. is used.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. Using the values presented above. For a fluid with a density of 0. Equation 8-8. as shown in meter factor Equation 8-28.01% ) + ( ± 0. (Eq. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. page 115. since both of these measurements are used to provide the volume measurement.) For ELITE meters. the overall proving uncertainty is: E = ( ± 0. (Refer to Section E. 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. 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.118%. which introduces a degree of error.0005 g/cc.118% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. From Equation 8-28.9. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the Coriolis master meter’s mass flow measurement and density measurement.8 g/cc.030% ) + ( ± 0. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0.126% 116 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. or the tables could be misapplied. page 202. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. 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. for master meter zero considerations and impact on uncertainty. However. a value of ±0. these factors may not even be applied. For the density uncertainty. The ELITE meter density uncertainty is ±0. If the meters are located close to one another. 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. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required. this equates to an uncertainty of ±0. If the liquid correction factors are used. 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. page 81. page 114. the errors can be significant. All of the terms in Equation 8-30 are the same as those in Equation 8-29. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter.1% is used for the mass measurement component.01%.

Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. This may not be possible. Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. A proving run time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. Because the frequency output can be scaled to a maximum 10.01%. depending on the facilities available to prove the Coriolis master meter. the test meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods. page 205. If there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. 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. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. other than as a transfer standard. An advantage of master meter proving is the fact that the proving time can be set to any desired value. page 49. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 117 . and appropriate compensations for variations in process conditions be used. it is usually quite easy to collect Number of Proving Runs No fewer than three proving runs should be performed. a minimum of 10. and the proving duration must be long enough to allow a sufficient number of pulses to be accumulated. it is important that the master meter performance be well characterized. the process temperature and pressure at the master meter should be monitored.000 pulses from a Coriolis meter may not be sufficient to ensure that the proving results are repeatable.000 Hz output. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. Recommended Proving Duration A proving time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. When using a master meter. Appendix G. page 223. Appendix F. Collecting 10. 10. discusses volume. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. even on proving runs of very short duration. 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.000 pulses. which must be considered when using a Coriolis master meter.3. If the master meter cannot be proved under normal operating conditions.000 pulses. Any inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved. For enough pulses to be accumulated. page 239. Accumulating Enough Pulses Maximizing the number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run will minimize errors due to incorrect pulse accumulation. provides a discussion on influences on the Coriolis meter’s mass measurements. and Appendix H. To minimize errors in pulse accumulation. as discussed in Section 6. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. Proving Duration for Repeatable Output The proving duration must be long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter. The proving duration should be no shorter than one minute when performing master meter proving. the proving should never be less than one minute in duration. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. discusses density.000 pulses must be accumulated from both the master meter and the test meter during the proving run.

If both test meters yield the same type of performance. damping considerations are not typically of concern when performing master meter proving. which provides a stable output signal. 118 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .8 (the factory-set default value). the problem generally lies with the master meter. In addition.025%). If one of the test meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. Damping Factor Recommendation Because no prover displacer is launched.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Repeatability The typical repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. 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. Problems can often be identified by using redundant metering in the pipeline. Damping factors larger than 0. which would cause changes in the fluid flow rate.05% (±0. 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. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Therefore. the recommended damping factor is 0. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter.8 are not recommended.

. . . . Trend Chart Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. . .3 9. . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Figure 9-1 Table 9-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 119 . . . . . . Meter Configured for Volume. . . . . . . . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . . Meter Factor Uncertainty . . . . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 9. . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . .0 or Higher . . .9 Proving Calculations Summary 9.0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Trend Chart . .2 9. . . . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 129 127 128 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Volume Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

120 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

The subscript m in Equation 9-6 stands for the meter location. The temperature and pressure measurements should be taken as close to the density measurement device as is practical. the density measurement could be performed at a location other than the Coriolis meter. If the density is obtained from a density meter or Coriolis meter. Equation 9-5 is used for proving the Coriolis meter mass reading against a volumetric prover. (Eq. (Eq. For additional information. the fluid density at the prover must be determined. 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. Accurate determination of the density is critical. refer to Using a Density Meter at the Prover. however. If the density is not determined right at the prover. page 25. which in turn will result in incorrect product accounting. If the fluid temperature and pressure remain constant between the prover and the density measurement device. Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving.2 Mass Meter Factor The basic mass meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-4. it will be necessary to prove the meter’s density measurement. 9-6) C tlm * C plm ρ p = ρ m * -------------------------C tlp * C plp For gravimetric tank and Coriolis master meter proving. or measuring temperature and pressure to convert to a standard volume.9 Proving Calculations Summary Volume Meter Factor 9. and Section 11. This eliminates the need for making a density measurement to convert volume to mass. page 64. A density factor (DF) is obtained. It can be installed either at the prover inlet or outlet. To allow comparison of the meter mass indication to the prover volume. 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. and Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement. Chapter 11. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. however. then: Ctlp = Ctlm. page 139. For volumetric proving devices. page 27. The density measurement device should be located as close to the prover as is practical. the prover mass is easily determined. and the density at the prover can be considered to be the same as the density at the meter. (Eq. 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. 9-4) Prover Mass MF m = ----------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Mass corrected to the conditions at the prover. Density Measurement Device. The density at the prover (ρp) is equal to the meter’s density reading times the density factor. These terms will then cancel out. then the density measurement must be 122 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . as shown in Equation 9-6.1. it is preferable to locate it between the meter and the prover. and Cplp = Cplm. 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.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. When performing provings against tank provers. The repeatability is used as an indication of whether the proving results are valid. refer to Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units.4 Repeatability The objective of proving a flowmeter is to obtain a meter factor. page 49. For small volume provers 3 or 5 runs of 10 passes each is recommended.3. The number of proving runs required for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. Meter Configured for Volume The API recommended equation for calculating repeatability is: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 123 . 9-8) MFm= MFv * DF where MFm= mass meter factor MFv = volume meter factor DF = density factor For additional details about this proving approach. 9. or some other component in the proving system. at least five proving runs are performed. 9-7) C oriolis Meter Pulse M meter = -----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6.05% often indicates these meters require maintenance. which provides proper accounting of the inventory being measured. 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. A repeatability value that exceeds 0.05%. The general criterion used when proving flowmeters is that the repeatability of the proving results be within 0. page 29. a batch totalizing device can be used. to provide some level of confidence in the proving results. An alternative is to prove the Coriolis meter’s volume and density measurements and calculate the mass meter factors from the following equation: (Eq. A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter mass instead of the number of pulses accumulated. Typically. the prover. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. This value can then be entered directly into Equations 9-4 and 9-5.3 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. This value is based on experience with turbine and PD meters proved with conventional pipe provers. 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).

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

1%.05% repeatability specification. a Coriolis meter that is functioning properly and is within the manufacturer’s specification would be considered to be unacceptable based on the 0. The total uncertainty is based on the contributions of the following components: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 125 . If density cannot be maintained within 0. it is recommended that a density sampling method be implemented to provide an average density for each proving run. 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. and the fluid properties should all be checked to verify the entire system is stable and functioning properly.0002 g/cc. For each error source.* 100 2*(FlowRate) The base repeatability is ±0. For example. as shown in Equation 9-12. A common method used to determine uncertainty is presented in ISO standard 5168. which is a total range of 0. A Coriolis meter is functioning properly if it is operating within its normal repeatability specification. such as crude oil/water mixtures. There will always be some degree of uncertainty associated with the proving results.0002 g/cc will consume a significant portion of the 0. This is twice the common proving guideline of 0. (Eq. then the Coriolis meter. the repeatability limits may need to be increased. Other difficult applications involve products with changing composition.05% repeatability specification. the repeatability specification for ELITE sensors is presented in Equation 9-11. Additional proving runs are recommended to improve confidence in the data. The total uncertainty is determined by performing a square root of the sum of the squares calculation on all of the error components. Alternatively. This may require increasing the size of a tank prover. Therefore.5 Meter Factor Uncertainty The meter factor calculated as a result of the proving can only be as accurate as the proving devices. If density cannot be maintained during the proving. A density variation of 0.05% may be an indication of whether a turbine or PD meter is functioning properly. 9-11) Zero Stability Repeatability (%) = 0. If the repeatability of a proving is greater than the usual repeatability.05%.05 + -----------------------------------. it does not necessarily indicate the same for a Coriolis meter. but it may require using proving runs with a greater quantity of fluid than would be used for a turbine meter.” This method of determining uncertainty involves identifying all of the sources of error. the proving system. The 0. “Measurement of fluid flow—Estimation of uncertainty of a flow-rate measurement. and determining the sensitivity of the measurement to the individual error sources.05%.Proving Calculations Summary Meter Factor Uncertainty 9 changing temperature and pressure. pipe prover or small volume prover. the uncertainty is multiplied by a calculated sensitivity coefficient. Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters Although a repeatability of 0.05% repeatability specification can generally be achieved with a Coriolis meter. 9.

126 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The proving equipment.6 Reproducibility and Trend Charting Reproducibility is the ability of a meter/prover system to reproduce results over a long period of time.25% — that is.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. if used • Any uncertainty in the density determination. 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. This concept is explained in more detail in Section 9.6. and will vary somewhat from one proving system to the next. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are ±0. For many pipeline applications. The reproducibility will ultimately be established from experience with each individual proving system. 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. the meter factor from the current proving should be within ±0. proving method. Understanding the uncertainty associated with the proving method is important for determining the applicability of the meter factor. The reproducibility requirements will be governed by Weights and Measures requirements or contract requirements. Uncertainties for each proving method are presented in Section 8. in service where the process fluid conditions remain relatively constant. and fluid properties will also have a significant impact. The proving reproducibility does not depend solely upon the performance of the meter. The value that is determined is dependent on the characteristics of the individual proving system. 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. 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.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. then the meter factor should not be changed.

and every effort should be made to assure that the Coriolis meter and proving system are functioning properly. If the meter factor varies from one proving to the next.25% 1.25% — that is. which are plotted in Figure 9-1. When A New Meter Factor Falls Outside The Established Meter Factor Uncertainty Limits. Meter Factor Trend Chart.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. Table 9-1. Figure 9-1. as discussed in the previous section.25% and –0.999 0. contains hypothetical meter factors for 11 provings. In addition to the acceptance limits. The proving uncertainty should be used as the criterion for determining when to change the value being used for the meter factor. page 128.Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting 9 A change in the meter factor greater than the user-defined limits should be considered suspect. the uncertainty of the proving method should also be included on the trend chart (represented in Figure 9-1 as dashed lines). and acceptance limits at +0.998 0.0009 MF = 1. Variations in the meter factor from proving to proving.004 1. 1.001 1 0. includes a trend chart for tracking the Coriolis meter’s meter factors over multiple provings.997 0. as illustrated in Figure 9-1.002 1.005 1.035%.003 Meter factor (MF) Acceptable meter factor range ±0. Appendix D. new uncertainty limits would need to be recalculated to determine when it would be necessary to change the meter factor again. the limits can be set around the average meter factor from a sequence of periodic provings. which exceed the user-defined limits. Alternatively. 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.001 MF = 1. Acceptable Meter Factor Range Is Determined From First Meter Factor. indicate that it might be necessary to perform provings more often. Uncertainties for each proving method are detailed in Section 8. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are 0. it is not necessarily appropriate to apply a new meter factor to the Coriolis meter’s reading.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 .996 0. 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. For many pipeline applications. And New Limits Are Established. which is defined to be ±0.25% of the centerline.0005 MF = 1. page 189.0013 Uncertainty of proving method ±0. A New Meter Factor Is Determined. the meter factor from the current proving should be within 0. The trend chart should be developed with the meter factor of the first proving as the centerline. held once per month. Whenever the meter factor is changed.995 1-Jun MF = 1. Trend charting of meter factors will be valuable in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter and determining the required frequency of proving.

0007 1.0009 Leave MF=1. 9. and often results in the meter factor being changed unnecessarily. 128 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The meter factor value used in this equation is the average meter factor from a number of proving runs.0013 Leave MF=1.0 or Higher Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. the meter’s inventory will be determined from Equation 9-13. However.0005 Change MF=1.035%) Determined to be 1.00135 — — 1.0005 Leave MF=1. volume meter factor (MFv).00065 to 1.0013 1. it does not provide an indication of the reliability of the proving technique.00165 — — Although this method is technically correct.0005 1. 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. These registers allow the results of a proving to be input directly into the transmitter’s memory.7 Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations In general. which eliminates the need for determining the uncertainty of the proving method and developing uncertainty limits. Data Are Charted In The Graph Shown In Figure 9-1. many users prefer to determine a new meter factor every time the meter is proved. or use an external device to correct the meter’s measurement.0007 1. RFT9739 with Software Version 3.0009 1.00055 to 1. The values in these registers correct the meter’s measurements as shown in Equation 9-14.001 Change 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.0013 New uncertainty limits (Uncertainty = ±0.0013 Leave MF=1. without having to modify the factory calibration factors.0014 Action Use MF=1. Trend Chart Data.0012 1.0006 1.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations Table 9-1.0005 Leave MF=1.00015 to 1. The meter factor that is determined during proving is entered into the appropriate register.001 Leave MF=1.00085 — — 1. 9-14) Corrected Measurement = MF * Uncorrected Measurement Three factors are available: mass meter factor (MFm).0015 1.001 1. (Eq.001 Leave MF=1.0011 1.00125 — 1. (Eq. and density factor (DF).0009 Change MF=1.0 and higher.00095 to 1.

Additionally. the meter’s pulse output will be modified. In order to determine the new meter factor. if the meter’s volume is proved. or manually. The problem is. the analog and digital values will not be affected. if a density factor (DF) is entered. 9-15) MFnew = MF current * MFproving external meter factor. This was done to prevent the accidental application of multiple factors to the meter’s volume measurement. and is set to 1. if the meter’s mass flow rate is proved.Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations 9 Because volume is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. 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 flow calibration factor is a coefficient. If the meter is then proved. Therefore. where MFcurrent=Meter factor currently being used MFproving=Meter factor determined from proving RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. If these two values were the same they would cancel out. and the proving results would not be applied to correct the meter inventory.0. the meter factor determined will actually be a composite of the meter factor from the proving and the current meter factor. (Eq. the mass and density measurements will not be corrected.0000. it will also correct the meter’s volume measurement. 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.0 Model RFT9712 transmitters. Alternatively. the volume meter factor (MFv) is only applied to the meter’s volume measurement. the meter factor can be set to 1. pulse and analog. The disadvantage to this approach is that the inventory measurement during proving will not be corrected by the old meter factor. However. Entering a volume meter factor (MFv) will cause the MFm and DF registers to be reset to a value of 1. Values in the meter factor registers adjust all of the meter’s measurements and outputs — digital. which is used to convert the time difference between the sensor pickoff signals to a mass flow rate. which should be entered in the meter factor register. The meter measurement can be corrected by externally applying a meter factor in a flow computer or DCS. However. a meter factor of 1.0000. the mass meter factor (MFm) that is determined will correct the meter’s volume measurement. (Eq. the meter measurement can be corrected internally by determining a new flow calibration factor.0000 would have been applied. using the approach of determining a new K-factor as shown in Equation 9-16 is not recommended for Coriolis meters. the MFv will automatically be reset to a value of 1. and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3. The calibration factor resides in the transmitter. Alternatively. For applications in which applying an external meter factor is not desired. Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended For batching applications — such as tank or truck filling. if a meter factor is being used. (Essentially. is not needed. Equation 9-15 should be used. it is recommended that a new meter flow calibration factor be determined using Equation 9-17. If a MFm or DF is entered.0000 during proving. as shown in Equation 9-16. the meter factor in Equation 9-13.) This can lead to considerable confusion and should be avoided. only the pulse output is affected by this approach. For turbine and PD meters this is accomplished by determining a new K-factor for the meter.000. have no meter factor registers. Likewise. 9-16) K–Factor old K–Factor new = -------------------------------MF proving Because the meter factor is already incorporated into the new K-factor. Then the new meter factor determined during proving would be entered into the meter factor register. The scalable frequency output of the Coriolis meter can lead to confusion.

security restrictions on the meter would need to be broken to accomplish this. 130 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it is important that a trend chart be developed for varying flow calibration factors (instead of meter factors. as described in Section 9. 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.6.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations (Eq. If this method is adopted. page 126). If there are Weights and Measures certifications associated with the meter.

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

132 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

A damping factor of 0. The damping value should never exceed 0.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations vibrate severely. • A Coriolis master meter is generally best suited to meter verification for ISO 9000 requirements. This will allow access to information on the meter configuration. flow rate reading. output signals and other transmitter information. • Multiple pulse counting devices can be connected to the transmitter’s frequency outputs as long as the resulting load is not excessive. The damping factor should not be modified after the meter has been proved. • 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. Proving Recommendations • Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving Coriolis meters.1 is recommended. is recommended. default damping factor of 0. ethylene.8 should be suitable for most proving applications. liquid CO2).) 134 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . • The factory-set. in which structural damage to other piping components has occurred. ELITE sensors have been designed to minimize crosstalk influences. • A set of wires (a “pigtail”) from the transmitter’s frequency output should be routed to a an appropriate connector or conduit junction box. to allow access to HART communication without opening the transmitter housing. a damping factor of 0. • Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. Improper density determination is the major source of problems when proving Coriolis meters with volumetric provers.1 is recommended. proving a Coriolis meter with an SVP is challenging. a volumetric master meter may be needed as a transfer standard. 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. • For products that exhibit significant density variations (such as LPG. but may be impractical for field applications. which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run. Generally. ten or more passes per proving run will provide the best results. • Because of the short prerun time when using a small volume prover (SVP). one of the transmitter’s analog outputs should be configured for density indication. proper density determination at the prover is required. • If the Coriolis meter’s density output will be used in the proving computations. • When a volumetric proving device is used to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. a density averaging device. • The transmitter’s frequency output should be scaled to provide the maximum number of pulses possible to reduce uncertainty due to pulse resolution. Vibration influences between two Coriolis sensors is known as crosstalk. Additionally. in a safe area. density reading. page 189. in a safe area. Transmitter Outputs and Configuration • It is recommended that the transmitter’s frequency output be used for both inventory measurement and proving. • If the prover is too small to obtain adequate repeatability.8. (See Appendix D. For small volume provers. to allow access to the proving signal without opening the transmitter housing.

• Make sure the prover detector switches are functioning properly. A density averager will be required if the density variation exceeds this value.0000. which may randomly trigger the counter. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. • If the meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved with a volumetric prover. make sure the volume of the hose does not change while the meter is being proved. Piping • Check for piping leaks. A prover prerun of 1 second or Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 135 . or any flowmeter. Piping 2. the density should vary by no more than 0. • Check all block and bleed valves to ensure proper sealing is being accomplished. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. The flow rate should never vary by more than ±10% while proving. Check for switch bounce. Check the ball for erosion and scoring. • If flexible hose is used for the prover connections. Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. Prover • For conventional pipe provers. make sure the plenum pressure has been properly set. Refer to page 218 for information on vibration effects. make sure the prover ball is properly filled to provide a good seal. • For small volume provers that use pressure to launch the piston. • 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. but does not drag.8. For small volume provers. • Crosstalk (vibration influences between Coriolis sensors) may be an issue if multiple Coriolis sensors are installed in the same pipeline. Ensure the ball is compatible with the process fluid.Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 10. greater is desired. to ensure proper tempering of the system. • 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. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate is stable during proving. Recording the meter’s configuration factors every time the meter is proved is a useful tool to aid in troubleshooting meter performance. • Make sure the prover is appropriately sized. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems.67 seconds. Entrained gas affects both the prover repeatability and the meter repeatability. Watch for oscillating control valves.1. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate for the prover size. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. Prover 3. Maintain sufficient pressure at the prover to keep the fluid from flashing. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. Meter configuration should always be checked to make sure it has not changed from one proving to the next. Coriolis meter 4.2 Proving Troubleshooting When proving Coriolis meters. and the activation is repeatable. • A few passes of the ball or displacer should be made before initiating the proving. The Prolink software can be used to save this data to an ASCII file on a computer.0002 g/cc. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. the minimum allowable prerun time is 0. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1.

This influence only becomes significant at high fluid velocities (greater than 50% of the sensor’s nominal full-scale flow rate). which can affect the short term repeatability of the meter. the meter response time may be too slow. • The Coriolis meter is not zeroed properly. or changes in the process fluid temperature or density may cause the meter’s “true zero” to change.1. the meter factor should be 1. If it is not. Cavitation creates flow and noise disturbances.0000. the meter should be operated at a flow rate high enough that 136 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The following sections describe how to resolve the discrepancies listed above.0000. and the same recommendations apply. Prior to any rezeroing. This is usually accompanied by poor repeatability. the next thing that should be checked is the operating pressure. this will cause an error in the density measurement and. However. Zero The next thing that should be checked is the meter zero. the volumetric flow measurement. refer to page 243 in Appendix H. and wiring the pressure signal into the RFT9739 transmitter. Fluid Flow Rate One other influence is the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. or very close to 1. subsequently. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. Changes in sensor mounting conditions. the source of discrepancy usually lies in one of the following areas: • The Coriolis meter response time and the prover size are mismatched. which in turn affects the volumetric flow measurement. Alternatively. Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility When a meter is proved. an RFT9739 transmitter can be used to automatically compensate for pressure influence. refer to page 229 in Appendix G. This is accomplished by installing an external pressure transmitter close to the sensor. If the sensor being used is affected by pressure. refer to page 212 in Appendix F. either by erosion or corrosion. Process Conditions Pressure After the damping factor and meter zero have been checked. For small volume provers. If the meter zero has drifted out of specification. • The sensor flow tubes have been physically changed. Selecting the proper sensor can minimize or eliminate this influence. Because the density measurement is based on frequency. For the effects of pressure on density accuracy. which can result in an error in the meter factor determination. For the effects of pressure on volumetric flow accuracy. which is why many commercial density meters limit the maximum fluid flow rate and require a slipstream installation. for more information on meter zeroing. there is no effect on the mass flow measurement. Increasing the flow rate results in a slight change in the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes.8. If the damping factor is too high. The RFT9739 uses a three-point density calibration algorithm. An increase in pressure has a stiffening effect on the sensor flow tubes. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. which automatically compensates for the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. Refer to Appendix E. For information on the effects of pressure on mass flow accuracy. • Difference between the factory calibration lab conditions and the operating process conditions has caused a shift in the Coriolis meter calibration. or from some type of coating. • Prover calibration is incorrect. the zero drift is insignificant. or the flow calibration factor was inappropriately modified. the meter should be rezeroed. • The meter was previously miscalibrated. in the order in which they should be checked. Pressure can affect both the mass flow and density measurements.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations • Make sure there is no cavitation. double check to make sure valves are closed and not leaking. page 195. If the meter will Damping The first thing that should be checked is the meter damping factor.

and the meter is used for an abrasive or corrosive fluid. If the fluid is highly abrasive or corrosive. the meter factor should be checked to make sure it has not been changed from the factory settings. which would affect the mass balance of the sensor flow tubes. 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. the meter can be returned to the factory or sent to an independent flow calibration facility to be rechecked. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 137 . A solvent cleaning process may be necessary to remove materials that deposit on the flow tubes. If all other causes for discrepancies (listed above) have been explored. 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. Coatings will generally affect calibration only if the coating material has a different specific gravity than the process fluid. and the meter factor is correct. Refer to page 232 for additional details on the influence of fluid flow rate on density accuracy. a new waterdraw calibration would be appropriate. Flow Tube Changes Gradual changes in the meter factor over time may be the result of flow tube erosion or corrosion.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. If the prover has not been calibrated in some time. which could lead to tube failure and the release of process fluid.

138 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

140 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The information in this section explains how to obtain and prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. the Coriolis meter can be used in any service where a density measurement is needed.6. To prove the Coriolis meter’s density. and influences on this measurement.1 Overview Meter proving is typically performed with volumetric provers. Some users might have concerns about using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove the meter’s mass flow measurement. This API standard contains a wealth of information on the installation and field verification of density measurement devices. it is important to prove the density measurement against an established reference. The density calibration constants Ca and Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated. (Eq. Therefore. 11-1) 1 2 ρ = C a -. as shown in Equation 11-1.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement—Continuous Density Measurement. The density measurement from a Coriolis meter could be thought of as being obtained from a separate measuring device. The resulting density factor (DF) is determined as shown in Equation 11-2. it should be kept in mind that a Coriolis meter’s density and mass flow measurements are entirely independent of one another. 11-2) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------ρ where ρ = Coriolis meter density measurement Refer to Appendix G. it falls under the requirements of API MPMS 14. A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. (Eq. 11-3) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MFm = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 141 . When proving the Coriolis meter’s mass flow measurement. (Eq. the density of the meter is compared to the density determined from a reference device. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. However. If the Coriolis meter’s density measurement will be used to prove its mass flow measurement. Much of the information presented in the following sections was obtained from API MPMS 14. the density factor (DF) is applied as shown in Equation 11-3. One alternative to installing a density meter at the prover is to use the density measurement from the Coriolis meter. 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. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the mass flow meter factor that is determined. 11. – C b f Because the Coriolis meter is a vibrating tube density meter. page 223. Another option is to install an additional Coriolis meter at the prover to provide a 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.

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

Using the RS-485 Output The RS-485 output signal is a ±5V square wave referenced to the transmitter ground. and operates in the Microsoft® Windows® graphical environment. see Micro Motion instruction manual Using the HART Communicator with Micro Motion Transmitters. additional circuitry in the transmitter is used to convert this digital density information into an analog output. the digital density output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average the digital information. and must not exceed 4000 feet (1220 meters) in length.) For more information. For more information. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 24 AWG (0.3 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Density Output Signals The Coriolis meter density measurement is calculated by the transmitter microprocessor. the transmitter. For more information. The calculated density can be accessed through digital communication with the transmitter. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. This handheld device is particularly convenient for field configuration and monitoring of the meter. In addition. the SMART FAMILY Interface Model 268. use terminals 26 (485B) and Digital Density The digital information from the transmitter is the most accurate. The ProLink program has additional features for performing meter diagnostics and logging data to ASCII data files for further analysis.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 11.4 kilobaud can be selected. 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. If density averaging is needed. The density measurement can also be obtained by using an appropriate flow computer. PLC.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. Baud rates between 1200 baud and 38. it can be read using a HART Communicator or the ProLink software program. (The older Rosemount communicator. Using ProLink Software with Micro Motion Transmitters. Micro Motion also has available a PC-based communications package. PLC or DCS. 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 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. The program requires a personal computer with an Intel® 386 or higher-version microprocessor. the ProLink software program. Interfacing to Digital Information The transmitter supports two digital communications protocols: HART and Modbus. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. which will convert either Bell 202 or RS-485 communications to RS-232. cannot be used with later-model RFT9739 transmitters. 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.

There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. Depending on the selected protocol. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22 (485A). For proving applications.5 seconds. Bell 202. The RFT9739 implements a selective digital software filter on the density output.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. The damping value is a filter coefficient. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. requirements vary as follows. the “internal damping” value for density should not exceed 0. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. A limitation of analog outputs is that they must be properly scaled and trimmed to provide an accurate measurement.1 seconds. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks — Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. If polling addresses are used. such as the RS-485. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. with an amplitude of 0. independent of the frequency of vibration of the meter. The value of the “internal damping” can be varied from 0 to 8192 seconds.2 or 2. However. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). the response time of the digital density made available to digital outputs. 15 meters for 0.2 kHz. Digital Density Response Time Using an RFT9739. RS-485 Multidrop Networks — Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. • Under Modbus protocol. Analog Density The transmitter analog output is typically used for process control. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. The baud rate is limited to 1200 baud. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15.1 mm2 wire). Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 27 (485A). up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network.3 mm2 wire. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. the primary variable (PV) analog output can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. • Under HART protocol. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0. the basic density measurement is updated by the microprocessor every 0. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. or a display. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the density. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. Consult 144 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level.8V peak-to peak. Therefore. depends on any additional “internal damping” that is applied. Therefore. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire.

there is a secondary digital filter. Based on these settings. For proving applications.9 g/cc = 20 mA. The value of the “secondary damping” can be varied from 0.25 If the resolution of the measurement needs to be improved.0125 X (mA) + 0.7 20 – 4 ρ(g/cc) = 0. 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. If density averaging is needed. the density-tocurrent relationship is determined as shown in Equation 11-7.7 g/cc = 4 mA. It is recommended that no additional damping be applied to the analog density output. so an external DC power supply is not required.9 – 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. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. the density can only be obtained from the SV analog output. The RFT9739 provides functions for trimming the analog output with a HART Communicator or the Prolink Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 145 . this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal. If means are not available to obtain the digital density. 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. if it is known that the fluid density will always fall in the range of 0. In this case. which can be used to apply additional damping to the analog output density measurement. the scaling range of the analog output can be reduced. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. The added damping value is the time coefficient of the secondary filter. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). For example. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.9 g/cc. The most typical configuration is 4-20 mA.0 g/cc = 4 mA. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. the density scaling can be set to 0. 11-7) X – X min ρ – ρ min ---------------------------------. Scaling the Analog Output The analog outputs can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs.7 to 0. PLC.= -----------------------------------X max – X min ρ max – ρ min Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered. one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). and 1. DCS). The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC.= --------------0. A typical configuration would be to set a density of 0. (Eq. and 0. page 144). and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA.0 g/cc = 20 mA.5 to 8192 seconds. the density-to-current relationship would be: X–4 ρ – 0. with a 1000 ohm load limit. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 the HART Communicator or ProLink manual when carrying out these operations. Using these values. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–).0625 X ( mA ) + 0. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible.7 --------------------.65 Analog Density Response Time In addition to “internal damping” (see Digital Density Response Time.

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

a pressure hydrometer should be considered. or by mass and volume measurements. The fluid density is determined from the mass of the fluid. and natural gas liquids. Fluid under actual flowing conditions is diverted into the pycnometer.0001 g/cc can be achieved using the sample and laboratory analysis method. ( 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). The sample point should be located as close as possible to the Coriolis meter. A pycnometer is used primarily for density proving when measuring light-end hydrocarbons such as ethylene. ethane mixtures. which introduce a degree of uncertainty into the density factor determination. because the meter factor cannot be calculated until the density factor has been determined. A pressure hydrometer works like a hydrometer. For fluids such as these. The sample is then taken to a lab. Density measurement accuracies of ±0.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. Again. If components of the fluid vaporize on exposure to the atmosphere. Simultaneously the density from the Coriolis meter is recorded along with the temperature and pressure at the meter. 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. 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.0001 g/cc. These products must be kept under pressure to remain in a liquid state. The density measurement accuracy for pycnometers is ±0. liquid CO2. at atmospheric conditions they become gas. and can withstand the application of internal pressure. The hydrometer is only suitable if the fluid vapor pressure is below the atmospheric pressure. The following equations are used to determine the Coriolis meter’s density factor. The pycnometer valves are closed. The sampling line should be located as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. then the pycnometer is removed from the pipeline and weighed. off of the main pipeline. and the internal volume of the pycnometer (density = mass/volume). 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 . the density measured by the meter must be corrected to reference conditions using correction factors. the density measurement by the hydrometer will not reflect the actual density of the fluid in the pipeline. except the cylindrical container used to collect the fluid sample can be sealed. 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. fluid properties must be considered. Sample and Laboratory Analysis This method requires a fluid sample to be drawn off the process pipeline into a suitable sampling container. The pycnometer is installed in a density sampling line. LPG. Therefore. The density of such products is greatly affected by changes in process temperature and pressure.

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

Sampling Loop Vent Valve (V2) and Vent Pipe Valve V2 is used to vent air and vapor from the pycnometer and density sampling loop.02% of the test fluid weight or the air-filled pycnometer weight. such as a globe valve. stable. It is most commonly open to the atmosphere. piping. components that are already present in the system may be suitable for generating sufficient pressure drop. and fittings between the Coriolis meter. The scale must have sufficient resolution to provide a measurement accuracy of ±0.2°F. The scale must be placed in a draft free environment and on a level. Valve V2 is also used to vent the process fluid from the density sampling line prior to removing the pycnometer. and 1 psi. For this reason. they usually work in a suitable fashion. are typically added to the pycnometer. When filling the pycnometer. Additional fittings. Before each use. The tubing size is commonly 3/8 to 5/8 inch. pycnometer. The vent valve should also provide as little pressure drop as possible in the open position. Locating the density sampling return line downstream of proving connections. Although block valves do not provide a great deal of flow control. All tubing. but must also be located downstream of the Coriolis meter. For a parallel density sampling installation. A valve that has the capability of throttling flow. the prover block valves can be used to throttle the flow. The largest practical tubing size should be used. 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. whichever is less. the scale must be checked for accuracy using class S or P certified test weights. allows the pressure drop through the prover to assist in forcing fluid through the sampling loop. Insulation The API Standard requires that the temperature and pressure differences between the density meter and pycnometer not exceed 0. but can be connected to a flare line. and is oriented vertically. Density Sampling Tubing The tubing that is used for the density sampling loop should be made of stainless steel. The size of this tubing will generally depend on what size valves are used on the pycnometer. to minimize pressure drop in the sampling loop. and must be capable of positive shutoff of flow. valve V4 would be located between the inlet and outlet lines to the density sampling loop. For a series density sampling installation. and must be capable of positive shutoff of flow. At the pycnometer. back into the main pipeline. Stainless steel quarter-turn ball valves with appropriate seating material are commonly used. vibration-free surface. This valve should provide as little pressure drop as possible in the open position.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. is preferred. and pressure and temperature instruments must be fully insulated. the vent line should be full of liquid prior to diverting flow back to the main pipeline. it is critical that the Coriolis meter and pycnometer be installed as close together as possible. Flow Throttling Valve (V4) Valve V4 is used to create sufficient pressure drop in the main pipeline to divert adequate flow through the pycnometer. The vent pipe is generally 1 to 2 feet tall. respectively. A valve with quick closing action is preferred. valve V4 is also located between the inlet and outlet to the density sampling loop. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 153 . Weigh Scale An electronic scale is used to weigh the pycnometer. preventing it from entering the main pipeline. In lieu of a separate flow throttling valve. In addition. the tubing should be equipped with suitable fittings that will allow the pycnometer to be removed from the sampling line. A valve with quick closing action is preferred. Stainless steel quarterturn ball valves with appropriate seating material are commonly used. which provide a suitable quick connect/disconnect.

Calculate the density factor (DF) for the two runs (as shown in the following section). 3. Record the weight (Wf). The density proving procedure is detailed below. and V3 should all be closed. Empty the pycnometer of its contents in a safe location. d. Pp. 10 to 15 seconds apart. Verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight (see page 155 for the procedure). 10. Record density data: a. V2. page 149. Fill the pycnometer using the following valve opening sequence: a. Tm. Pm. 5. Adjust the throttle valve V4 to divert fluid into the sampling loop.5 damping value.Open sampling loop vent valve V2. 4. Break the pipe fitting between V1 and Vin. The inlet and outlet valves to the pycnometer Vin and Vout should be open. 154 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . b.) 8. Open sampling loop inlet valve V1. c.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density Proving Procedure Again. Allow the system to achieve steady state conditions: a. the density update is fairly rapid. Weigh the pycnometer immediately.Pycnometer temperature. Remove the pycnometer from the sample loop and check for leakage. Close density sampling inlet and outlet valves V1 and V3. First close Vout. ρ. Immediately close the pycnometer valves. (With a 0. Tp. ensure sufficient flow is being diverted into the sampling loop. or Figure 11-3. The density factor for the two runs must agree to within 0. d.Check for agreement of pressure (to 1 psig) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. Verify the scale calibration against certified test weights. b.Pycnometer pressure. (It is suggested that three or four readings be made.) d. to ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer valves. Check for agreement of temperature (to 0. (Alternately. page 150. c. b.05%. Verify that pressure and temperature measurement devices are operating suitably. 1. then close Vin.02%. 2. open the return valve V3. The density factors for the two runs are averaged to obtain the final density factor for the Coriolis meter (DFavg). e. there will be small changes in the last digits of the density reading. e. 6. a small amount of gas will be released. an additional vent valve and line can be installed between valves V1 and Vin. personnel should be informed of escape routes and the location of the nearest fire extinguishers. It may necessary to record two or three readings and average them. Coriolis meter density reading. c. 14. 7. Coriolis meter temperature. Install the pycnometer in the density sampling loop as shown in either Figure 11-2. repeat steps 4 through 13 until two consecutive runs agree to within 0. Close V2.2°F) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. 13. The measured evacuated weight must agree with the pycnometer’s certificate weight to within ±0. Valves V1. Personnel must have a complete understanding of the fluid properties and associated hazards. Perform the following operations to disconnect and remove the pycnometer: a. Coriolis meter pressure.) 11. If a flow indication (FIp) is being used. There should be plans for worst case events. If they do not.When the pycnometer and sampling loop are full of fluid. Repeat steps 4 through 11 for a second run. e. b.Open vent valve V2 to discharge any vapor from the sampling line.05%. 9. safety should be the top priority for the operating personnel of the density proving system. 12.Break the pipe fitting between Vout and V3. Any leakage from the pycnometer will void the test and require steps 4 through 9 to be repeated. Close the vent valve V2. 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

0000. Process Conditions Pressure — After the density factors have been checked. If it is not. • Make sure there is no condensation or contaminant on the outside of the pycnometer. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. • Pycnometer calibration is incorrect. The damping value should be set to 0. the next thing that should be checked is the operating pressure. either by erosion or corrosion. 160 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. Density Factor Offset When a meter is proved. • The sensor flow tubes have been physically changed. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate. • Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. is recommended. • 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. Selecting the proper sensor can minimize or eliminate this influence. • Field verification of the pycnometer’s evacuated weight is required. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. Maintain sufficient pressure to keep the fluid from flashing. Pycnometer 2. The following sections describe how to resolve the discrepancies listed above. • Difference between the factory calibration lab conditions and the operating process conditions has caused a shift in the Coriolis meter calibration. • The meter was previously miscalibrated. Coriolis meter 3. If they have been changed. Density Calibration Factors Check to see if these factors have been changed. in the order in which they should be checked. If the sensor being used is affected Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. which in turn affects the volumetric flow measurement. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. Troubleshooting When proving a Coriolis meter’s density measurement. a density averaging device. then the source of discrepancy usually lies in one of the following areas: • Density calibration factors have been changed.5 or less. 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. Enter original factors back into the transmitter. An increase in pressure has a stiffening effect on the sensor flow tubes.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Summary Recommendations and Troubleshooting ethylene. • 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. Pressure can affect both the mass flow and density measurements. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1. and reprove the density measurement. or very close to 1. determine why.0000. the density factor should be 1. as described on page 155. or from some type of coating. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. liquid CO2). which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run. Pycnometer • Ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer fittings or valves.0000.

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

162 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . Volumetric Master Meter . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . .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 Master Meter Mass . . Conventional Pipe Prove . . . Proving conversion factors. . . . Gravimetric Tank Prover . . . . . . 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 163 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover. . . . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. .

164 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

Meter Serial No.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-1. Conventional Pipe Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. 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 . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. gal/min Meter Tag 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. gal/min Meter Tag No. Meter Serial No.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-2.

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 . Meter Serial No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. gal/min Meter Tag No. Volumetric Tank Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-3.

gal/min Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.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. Meter Serial 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 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 .

gal/min Meter Tag No.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-5. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. Meter Serial No. 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 * 8.3454 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. 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 * 8.3454 Meter Factor = Corr. Meter Tag No.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 . 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. Gravimetric Tank Prover Company Target Test Quantity Weigh Scale Resolution Meter K-Factor Flow Rate lb lb pulse/gal Date Meter Model No.

51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.999098 k/m³=SG * 999.0016 1.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.0 1.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.8 1.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.0012 1.0006 1.0011 1.0 0.6 1. 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 = 8.2 1.4 1.0005 1.3 1. Proving conversion factors. Density. the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.0005 1.0007 1.9 1.8 0.0008 1.6 0.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement .9 0. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.0023 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0. g/cc 2.0009 1. kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density.001 * kg/m³ *If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity). Table A-1.0019 1.0007 1.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101.0009 1.5 Correction Factor 1.098 Table A-2.5 1.1 1.7 1.0007 1.0014 1.0005 1. Buoyancy correction factors.7 0.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . Small Volume Prover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . . . . Proving conversion factors. . . . . . Conventional Pipe Prover . . . . .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. . . . . . . Volumetric Tank Prover . . . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . . . . 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 182 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 173 . . . . . . Buoyancy correction factors . . . . . Coriolis Master Meter Mass . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . Volumetric Master Meter . . Coriolis Meter Mass vs. . . Gravimetric Tank Prover .

174 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

gallons. for use in developing forms with other units of measure. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 175 . Table B-1 provides conversIon factors. 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.

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.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 . 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 Tag No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-1. Meter Serial No.

Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Meter Serial No. 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. Meter Tag No.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 .Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-2. 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.

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 Tag No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. 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.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-3.3454 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. Meter Serial No. 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.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-4. Coriolis Meter Mass vs.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 . 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.

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

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

(Tm ) Coriolis meter pressure. Temp. Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report Location: Product: CORIOLIS METER DATA Manufacturer: Model: Density of Test Weights. (ρm ) Coriolis meter temperature. (Wf ) Buoyancy correction.: 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. h Air density. PBV Pycnometer evaluated weight. (Pp ) Ambient temperature g/cc °F psig °F psig °F = 0. (ρf ) Density factor. Td (°F): 3 Serial No..0012 * [1 – (0. (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 . (Mf ) Fluid density. ρA Pycnometer air-filled weight. Field Wo Difference between field and certificate (≤0. (PVtp ) Fluid filled weight. (Pm ) Pycnometer temperature.84 g/cc for SS) Date: Meter Tag No.: PBV (cm ): Wo (g): Ref. Wa Field-evacuated weight.: PYCNOMETER DATA Report No.C Proving Forms for Density Measurement Form C-1. (TC ) Corrected volume. (PC ) Temperature correction. (Tp ) Pycnometer pressure. (CBW ) Fluid mass.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. ρTW : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pycnometer base volume.000032 * Line 3)] Serial No.: Current DF : (7. Wo Elevation.

Meter Serial No. Density conversion factors. Meter Tag No.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.Proving Forms for Density Measurement C Form C-2. Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions Company Meter Model No.999098 * SG(15°C) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 187 . 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. Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8.99012 * SG(60°F) g/cc = .428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc g/cc = .3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.

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 .

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 191 .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.

Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.9975 0.D Proving Charts Form D-1.05% 0.00% 192 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0025 1.9925 Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No. Meter Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.15% 0.0050 1.9950 0.0075 1.0000 0.10% 0. Calibration Factor K–Factor Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Meter Factor Repeatability 0.

10% 0.9990 0.Proving Charts D Form D-2.0010 1.0000 0.05% 0.9970 Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Density Factor Repeatability 0.0020 1.00% Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 193 .0030 1.9980 0.15% 0. Prover Base Volume Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial Number Density Calibration Factor 1. Density Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.

194 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

196 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

Although the zeroing time and number of tube cycles can be specified by the user. E. • Using an external switch if one has been wired to the transmitter. in Appendix F. This is the default zeroing time. A valve downstream from the sensor must be closed to ensure there is no flow through the sensor during the zeroing procedure. the baseline offset between the pickoffs (∆t) under no-flow conditions is determined. or another HART-compatible or Modbus-compatible master controller. performing the zeroing procedure while valves are not fully closed can result in an incorrect ∆tzero value. 5. When the meter is properly zeroed. Rezeroing of the meter should not be performed unless it is necessary. based on the sensor flow tube frequency. the average flow indication under no-flow Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 197 . If it is not properly done it may introduce error. • Using the scroll and reset functions. 3.) The meter can be zeroed in any of four ways: • Using the zero button on the transmitter electronics module (field-mount RFT9739 only). E-1) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆tzero ) When the meter is initially installed it must be zeroed. 2. the ProLink program. if the transmitter has a display. The remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. The zeroing operation takes approximately 40 seconds. For example. the following conditions must be met: 1. 4. (Eq. The sensor cable must be wired to the transmitter prior to applying power to the transmitter. The purpose of this appendix is to help to evaluate the need for meter rezeroing. It takes approximately 40 seconds for the tube to vibrate a total of 2048 cycles. as indicated by Equation E-1.2 Meter Zero Procedure For the ∆tzero value to be valid. (It may be necessary to block the sensor in by closing an additional upstream valve if the fluid is extremely thermally expansive. which would cause all subsequent measurements to be in error.Appendix E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed E.1 Overview As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. • Using a HART Communicator. The sensor must be properly mounted in the pipeline. The ∆tzero value is then used in Equation E-1 for computing the mass flow rate. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent ∆t measurements (∆tflow). or if there are flow pulsations that would cause movement of fluid in the sensor. The result of zeroing is that a ∆tzero value will be determined and be stored in a zero register. This process is called zeroing the meter. Influences on the meter zero are described starting on page 214. it is recommended that no fewer than 2048 cycles be selected. The transmitter must have been connected to power and warmed up for at least 30 minutes. The sensor must be full of process fluid at typical process temperature and fluid density during the zeroing procedure.

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

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

zero offset errors should be minimized. Rezero the meter (Section E. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until the measurement error is within acceptable limits. Proper rezeroing of the meter will eliminate large zero offset errors.2) if the measurement error exceeds acceptable tolerance. pressure. reducing the need to rezero the meter. 9. If desired.01%. 5. to calculate the measurement error from the average zero value and the operating flow rate. page 198).9980. and density) should also be recorded. The average process conditions (temperature. If a zero offset creates an error that exceeds the acceptable accuracy tolerance. checking of the meter could then be discontinued.2%. If the measurement error cannot be made to be within acceptable limits. resulting in a meter factor of 0. 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.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? E. 7. For example. to track the meter’s zero performance over time. If the meter was not reproved. If desired. the meter should be able to continue to operate without rezeroing as long as the operating flow rate is not reduced substantially. contact the factory. View the meter’s zero reading (see Section E. page 199. 6. record both sets of data — before and after zeroing — and indicate on the meter zero chart that the meter was rezeroed.1 lb/min. the meter factor of 0. Halt flow through the meter. 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. page 197. Now the meter has no zero offset error. and follow these steps: 1. If the meter zero is consistently within tolerance over a period of one year.2. E. 2. (Prior to rezeroing.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. Reinitiate flow through the meter. Use Equation E-2. It is best to select a meter that will operate in its upper flow range. if the meter had a zero offset of 0.9980 would still be used and the meter output would be 200 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . record the data collected from step 3 on form E-1.2). whereas an operating flow rate of 100 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0.1%.7 Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? When the meter is initially put into service it must be zeroed and proved.0%. Before the next proving the meter was rezeroed and the zero offset of +1 lb/min was eliminated. 8. If the meter was rezeroed. To evaluate the need for rezeroing. 4.3. Examples are provided below which illustrate cases where meter proving is needed and where meter proving is not needed. and a 10 lb/min operating flow rate would result in a measurement error of 1. the meter must be rezeroed to bring it into tolerance. This may require bypassing flow around the meter (see Section E. determined from zero readings accumulated over a 30 to 60 second time period. an operating flow rate of 1000 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. refer to Section E. By operating the meter within a 10:1 turndown from its maximum specified flow rate. Record the average zero value. page 204. 3. double check to make sure valves are closed and there is no flow through the meter). Restore any modifications to low-flow cutoff or damping to their original values. The meter would be reading high by 0.

above. rezero the meter. Prove the meter. If the zero has shifted excessively. Check the zero offset using Equation E2.2%. From this example it is easy to see why proving would be required after the meter was rezeroed to determine the correct meter factor. 2.03 lb/min.3. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. Any meter zeroing procedure should also include viewing the meter’s zero reading to make sure that zeroing is really needed. The meter is checked again after the next 2 week period and found to be offset by +0. b. Make sure to replace the old low flow cutoff after the proving session is complete. Zero offset readings from all intermediate zero checks should be recorded. 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. It is determined that this zero offset would not require rezeroing the meter. to make sure it has not drifted to make the meter fall out of acceptable tolerances. This would result in a +0. 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. If the zero offset is excessive. (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. Since the meter is being monitored and excessive zero offsets are eliminated when they arise. Check the meter zero as described in Step 1a. page 199. The meter zero is checked after 2 weeks and is found to be offset by +0.1 lb/min. 1. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 201 . above. Based on the examples above. the meter does not need to be reproved every time it is rezeroed. the rezeroing maintenance procedure for the Coriolis meter could be eliminated. Prior to proving the meter the zero is checked. A program has been put into place to check the meter zero every 2 weeks. 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. It is determined that the error due to this offset is insignificant for the operating flow rate of 500 lb/min. page 198. Repeat the procedure outline in Step 1a. In this case. Apply the following procedure in between provings: a. one may conclude that they should just establish a program to rezero the meter on a regular basis. to determine if this zero offset value is excessive. c.) Record the new zero offset on the proving sheet. If necessary. and it is found that there is a –0. 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. During a proving session do the following: a.05 lb/min zero offset. Use Equation E-2. The meter is rezeroed and afterwards the zero is checked again. d. However. there is potential for incorrectly zeroing the meter if valves are not fully closed. page 199. The new offset is +0. If necessary rezero the meter. Determine the meter’s average zero reading using the procedure described in Section E. so care must be taken in adopting a meter zeroing procedure. until the zero is within tolerance.1% error at a flow rate of 500 lb/min. d. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. If the zero offset does not create an excessive error leave it alone. c. Routine checks during proving would still be warranted. In the majority of applications the meter will never need to be rezeroed.5 lb/min. b.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. The following procedures can be followed to eliminate the need to reprove the meter every time it is rezeroed.

200 and flowing out it would deduct only 99. most cavern storage applications have widely varying flow rates. The average zero offset must fall within Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2.8 Zero Considerations for Bi-directional Flow The meter is often used to measure bidirectional flow for loading. page 198.200 lb and flowing out the meter would deduct only 99.000 lb of product flows into the cavern and 100.2% error in and –1.2% error in the reverse flow direction. As flow rate decreases the zero uncertainty component increases. unloading and cavern storage. • 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.2% error in the forward flow direction and a –0.2% error in and –0. The total uncertainty for an ELITE master meter is obtained from the following equation: 202 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 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. the meter would register 100. E. The normal operating flow rate is 500 lb/min. It has been verified experimentally that a Coriolis meter’s flow calibration factor is unaffected by flow direction. Cavern Storage Example A meter has a +1 lb/min zero offset that has not been characterized. As an illustration. Also assume that the same +1 lb/min zero offset (+0. • The master meter must be zeroed every time it is moved to a new location. page 217). The average zero offset should also fall with Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. if the meter is not properly zeroed.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of only 100 lb/min. Not having the meter properly zeroed can result in large errors. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. especially in applications where the flow rate fluctuates greatly. However. both in and out of the cavern. the meter factor should not change significantly between the forward and reverse direction.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E.2% error out). Flowing into the cavern. It is important to make sure the meter is properly zeroed.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of 500 lb/min (+0. • Before zeroing. page 217). The following hypothetical case is presented to illustrate some key points. A zero offset will affect the accuracy of the meter and will be passed on to the meter being proved. The guidelines below should be followed when using a Coriolis master meter.3. which results in a +0. Determining different meter factors for the forward and reverse direction is of little use if the flow rate is varying significantly. The net error would be 400 lb.0% error out). the meter would register 100.800 lb.9 Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Proper meter zeroing is critical for Coriolis master meters. The net error would be 1200 lb. • It is also recommended that the test meter’s zero offset be checked as described in Section E. The master meter uncertainty is the composite of the base uncertainty and the zero uncertainty. Flowing into the cavern. assume that 100.000 lb. The best way to eliminate these types of errors is to establish a meter zeroing procedure in conjunction with meter proving. • The master meter offset should be checked as described in Section E. Assume that 100.000 lb of product flows into the cavern at a rate of 500 lb/min and 100. If the meter has been zeroed properly. page 198. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. different proving meter factors can be obtained for the forward and reverse flow directions.3. To compound the problem.

1% + --------------------------------------------.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E (Eq. it is specified that the maximum allowable uncertainty is ±0. For example. Substitute the uncertainty and the zero stability into Equation E-3 and solve for the mass flow rate: 0. the mass flow rate must equal or exceed 166.1% + --------------------------------------------. The proving flow rate must exceed the minimum mass flow rate of both the test meter and master meter. E-3) Zero Stability Uncertainty% = ± 0.* 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% or less.25%. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 203 .25 lb/min ± 0.7 lb/min.7 lb/min In order to achieve an uncertainty of ±0. If the master meter is a CMF300.* 100 Mass Flow Rate Minimum mass flow rate = 166. the zero stability is ±0.25 lb/min.25 % = ± 0.

00 Operating Flow Rate: Was meter rezeroed? 0. Average Zero Reading (lb/min) Date: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Zero Offset Factor (%) 0. Fluid Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Form E-1.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate 204 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .00 Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. Meter Zero Chart Location Sensor Model Sensor Serial No.

. . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of Sound . . . . . . . . . . .1 F. . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Profile . Influences on Tube Stiffness . . . . . . . Meter Zero Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy . . . Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . . . . . . . Simplified model of an operating Coriolis sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor . . . . 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature Effect On Zero Offset . . . Vibration. . . . . . . . . . . Coating/Plugging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Corrosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero uncertainty specifications . . . . . . . . Zero Stability or Zero Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Viscosity . . Other Influences. .2 Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mounting for sensor vibration isolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix F Mass Flow Measurement F. . . . . .

206 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

F-2) · m = Kcal ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) * ( 1 – KT * 0. RFT9739 signal processing block diagram.0001 * T ) * [ 1 + K P * 0.01 ( 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. The equation used for determining the mass flow rate of the fluid flowing through the meter is shown as Equation F-2.Mass Flow Measurement Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement F Figure F-3. 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. (Eq.

Table F-1 lists pressure coefficients for Micro Motion flow sensors that are affected by pressure. 210 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .) The need for pressure correction is dependent on the sensor size and model. the tube becomes stiffer. page 195. the flow tube becomes stiffer. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. Calibration constant. As temperature decreases. As temperature increases. which would be interpreted as an increase in the mass flow rate.0002 0. The value of the correction coefficient varies from one sensor size to the next. The temperature signal from the RTD mounted on the flow tube is used by the transmitter to correct for the effect of temperature variations. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. The pressure components of Equation F-2. Meter zero. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. making it more difficult to be deflected.009 0. 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. the tube becomes more elastic.0008 0. increasing the temperature of the flow tube will cause it to deflect a greater amount. (Pressure input is shown in the lower functional blocks in Figure F-3.79% per 100°C change in temperature. and is independent of changes in fluid properties. are used only for specific sensors and applications that warrant pressure compensation. Pmeas and Pcal). Table F-1. The factor is different for each individual sensor. the larger the value of this factor. tzero — The zero value represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs under no-flow conditions. for information about zeroing the meter.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The values ∆tzero. increasing the pressure inside the flow tube will cause it to deflect less.005 0. which would be interpreted as a decrease in the mass flow rate. Sensor Model D300 and DL200 D600 and DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient*. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. page 209. and for Model DL sensors. Pressure coefficients for flow. determined by zeroing the Coriolis meter at startup. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. Pressure coefficient. The value of the temperature coefficient is different for different flow tube materials. KT and T (obtained from the sensor RTD). The unit of measure is grams per second flow per microsecond of time difference (g/s/µs). which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. where it is used in the calculation of the mass flow rate. Pressure correction is generally required only for 2-inch and larger sensors. However. (Refer to Appendix E. The larger the sensor. The value of the calibration constant is determined when the meter is calibrated. Each sensor model behaves somewhat differently when fluid properties change. KP 0. As pressure increases.0006 *Percent offset per psi pressure F.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The Coriolis force depends only on the mass flow rate of the fluid.26% per 100°C change in temperature. KT — The temperature coefficient compensates for the influence of tube temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube material. are always used in the mass flow rate computation. Key parameters of Equation F-2 are discussed below.) Temperature coefficient. 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. The pressure measurement from an external pressure transducer can be input to the transmitter. page 209 (KP . KP — The pressure coefficient compensates for the influence of fluid pressure on the stiffness of the flow tube.

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

This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. However. 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 -0. page 214. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. which reduces the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. CEQ 6079 transmitter is capable only of reading pressure from a HART Bell 202 output.4 -0.) Figure F-5. The transmitter then automatically compensates for pressure. page 213. lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the mass flow rate measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 CMF300 D600 Pressure (psig) 212 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). In bent-tube designs. The effect on ELITE CMF100.1 Mass flow rate error (%) 0 -0. and DL200 sensors are significantly impacted by pressure. CMF200. geometry. diameter. and CMF300 sensors is an order of magnitude less than for the Model D sensors. Only Model D300.3 -0. and F-6b.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. (The RFT9712. However.2 -0. 0. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). DL100. and a pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. page 210. Figures F-6a. D600. Figure F-5 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. The flow tube wall thickness. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. Table F-1. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter.2 0. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter.

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

page 209.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Figure F-6b. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent time difference measurements (∆tflow). 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 meter a number of times in succession under constant process conditions. 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 remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. page 195. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input. see Appendix E. represents the maximum anticipated variation in the meter’s stored zero. The effect of zero stability on the accuracy of the meter can be understood by examining Equation F-3. It does not describe an actual zero error. This calculation is presented in Equation F-2. for a stable set of process and installation conditions. The meter’s zero stability. (For additional information about meter zeroing. which is the nominal uncertainty equation for Coriolis meters. 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. or zero uncertainty. This process is called zeroing the meter. 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 .

a zero offset will skew the nominal meter uncertainty.2 0 -0. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor.6 -0. this difference is very small. and the meter calibration will fall within the base uncertainty (±0. This relationship is illustrated in Figure F-7. as described below. page 216.10% or ±0. which represents the nominal uncertainty boundaries for a Coriolis meter.15%) from the sensor’s specified maximum flow rate down to a flow rate of zero. Generally. assuming that a “normal” zero value has been captured by the transmitter. the transmitter will capture the “true zero” value. and reading the meter’s mass flow rate indication (as described in Section E.8 0.* 100 Mass Flow Rate where Base Uncertainty = Accuracy of sensor. Figure F-7. However. Once the amount of zero offset has been determined.3. It is important to understand that the boundaries shown in Figure F-7 represent the uncertainty in the meter’s measurement. Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors.4 -0. However. 1 Nominal meter uncertainty (%) 0. 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. the measurement error can be calculated using Equation F-4. page 198). ±0.10% for ELITE sensors. expressed as a percentage. F-3) Zero Stability Nominal Uncertainty (%) = ± Base Uncertainty (%) + --------------------------------------------. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing.4 0.15% for Model D sensors) Zero Stability = Determined from individual sensor specifications Mass Flow Rate = Operating flow rate From Equation F-3. If the meter is zeroed perfectly. 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. The illustrated boundaries do not represent a signature curve for Coriolis meters. Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset The zero offset is the difference between the “stored zero” value and the “true zero” value. The amount of zero offset can be determined by halting flow through the meter completely. determined from individual sensor specifications (±0.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F (Eq.8 -1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Nominal full-scale flow rate (%) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 215 .2 -0.6 0.

F-4) Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. repaired. As a result.) A less predictable cause of a zero offset is a change in flow tube temperature. page 195. which presents measurement error and uncertainty.5 1 0.5 0 -0. or otherwise altered.1% of the meter’s nominal full-scale flow rate. which would cause the curve presented in Figure F-8 to return to the nominal uncertainty curve presented in Figure F-7. (For information about rezeroing. page 215. 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.1% of nominal full-scale flow. The exact mechanism by which temperature affects the meter zero is not fully understood. Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor — based on an assumed zero offset of +0. see Appendix E. Furthermore. if the sensor mounting is changed or the sensor or transmitter is removed. page 215.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy (Eq. serviced.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 . It is likely that temperature variations change the stresses in the flow tubes. which is discussed below. typical uncertainty limits have been established. The zero offset error points shown in Figure F-8 were determined by calculating the zero offset using Equation F-4. Testing has been conducted on sensors to characterize the relationship between zero offset and temperature. The magnitude of the drift and the direction of the drift varies from one sensor to the next. 2.5 2 1. Figure F-8. Zero offset errors can be eliminated by rezeroing the meter. which is interpreted as flow and results in a change in the meter’s “true zero” value. it is imperative that there be no fluid flow through the sensor. In order to obtain an accurate zero. These changes in stress levels can result in slight variations in the location of the pickoff detectors relative to one another. Micro Motion’s uncertainty specification for the effect of temperature on the meter zero is presented in Table F-2. the meter must be rezeroed. This graph illustrates the error that would result if the meter zero was offset by +0. The uncertainty limits were then determined from Equation F-3.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate The impact of a hypothetical large zero offset on meter accuracy is illustrated in Figure F-8.

Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Table F-2.10 ±0. lb/min = Zero offset uncertainty for the effect of temperature on the meter zero. Other Influences The following sections discuss other process variables and installation conditions that might affect the accuracy of the meter. (Eq.00125 ±0. the amount of temperature variation and the operating flow rates.000 Base Uncertainty (%) ±0. lb/min/ °C Toperating = Operating process fluid temperature. product composition) and. pressure.025 ±0. the less impact a zero offset will have. The higher the operating flow rate.15 [B] Zero Stability (lb/min) ±0. Any zero offset error is eliminated by rezeroing the meter at the new process temperature.* 100 Total Uncertainty (%) = ± Operating Mass Flow Rate where A B C = Base uncertainty. typically do not require rezeroing. Assessing the need for rezeroing is described in Appendix E. Not every sensor will exhibit this amount of error. therefore. Temperature-related zero offset errors will be minimized by rezeroing the meter. [A] Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Nominal Full-Scale Flow Rate (lb/min) 500 1600 5000 25.10 ±0. The total uncertainty for the meter’s mass flow measurement is determined using Equation F-5 and the values in Table F-2. % = Zero stability. Such applications generally have steady process conditions (temperature.5 [C] Zero Offset Uncertainty for Temperature Effect* (lb/min/ °C) ±0.05 ±0.25 ±2. page 195. Legal trade requirements prohibit rezeroing the meter.10 ±0.08 ±0. and can be used to compute the total meter uncertainty for varying operating temperatures. For applications that require a larger turndown. Table F-2 also lists the meter base uncertainty and zero stability values. °C It should be kept in mind that Equation F-5 describes the maximum uncertainty for all sensors. Zero uncertainty specifications. and the magnitude of their impact will vary greatly from one application to the next.5 *Worst-case zero offset due to process fluid temperature change away from the zeroing temperature. These influences are not well defined.016 ±0. unless the meter calibration is recertified. ELITE meters should be selected because they have lower zero offset uncertainty versus temperature than Model D meters. The need for rezeroing will depend upon the characteristics of the sensor. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 217 . F-5) 2 2 B + ( C * Toperating – T zero ) A + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. °C Tzero = Temperature at which the meter was zeroed.

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 . Sensors are designed to withstand vibrational amplitudes associated with good pipeline practices. This does not affect the flow measurement accuracy. 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. the amount of current that can be supplied to vibrate the tubes is limited. etc. as illustrated in Figure F-9. fluids with higher surface tension will tend to create a more uniform dispersion of any entrained gas in the fluid.) • Fluid pressure Larger sensors have a lower tolerance for entrained gas than smaller meters. even though the maximum power is being applied to the driver. In severely vibrating pipelines. The transmitter will automatically indicate an error condition when the drive becomes saturated. the sensor can be isolated from the vibration with flexible piping and vibration isolating pipe supports. The combination of gas and liquid dampens the vibration of the sensor flow tubes. well mixed. Vibration Because Coriolis sensors operate by vibrating the flow tubes. In general. The drive gain should normally be between 3 and 4 volts DC. For proving applications this can result in unacceptable repeatability. The sensor will perform better in these types of applications than in those where the gas easily breaks out and accumulates. 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. Actually. are: measurement errors will start to occur at approximately 1 to 3 percent gas by volume. However. creating more of an emulsion. based on tests performed with air and water. The shorter the batch the worse the repeatability will become. If it exceeds 13 volts DC. yet they provide excellent performance. The meter drive gain reading can be used for determining whether drive saturation is occurring. Vibration testing has revealed that the introduction of random vibration can increase the variation in the meter’s flow measurement indication. 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. Due to intrinsic safety limitations. This is called drive saturation. Performance ranges for a sensor’s ability to handle entrained gas. at which time the output becomes unpredictable. At some point.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. and the flow tube will stop vibrating at 5 to 15 percent gas by volume. A sensor’s sensitivity to entrained gas is difficult to determine. the meter is no longer capable of making a measurement. Significant measurement errors will occur as the tube amplitude decreases. Entrained gas causes the meter reading to be low until the meter reaches the drive saturation point. the measurement accuracy of the meter will begin to degrade. Once drive saturation occurs. but will result in a degradation in repeatability as the run time is decreased. sensors are often installed where they are exposed to external vibrations. 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. A point can be reached where the tubes will no longer vibrate at the design amplitude. because the fluid has a greater influence on the overall mass of the system (tube and fluid) as the tube size increases. Once this occurs. severe drive saturation has occurred. page 219. which requires the drive circuitry to output more energy to keep the tubes vibrating. stratified.

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

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

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

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical sensor operating frequencies . . . . . . . Temperature . . . . 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 . . Temperature effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of Sound . . . . . . . . . Sensor Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid Flow Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure. Mounting for sensor vibration isolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velocity of sound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vibration . . . . . . Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas . . Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . Corrosion . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input . . . . . . . RFT9739 signal processing block diagram . . . . . . . . .Appendix G Density Measurement G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure coefficients for density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FD and K3 values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coating/Plugging . . .1 G. . . . . Components of a Coriolis flow sensor . . . . . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy .2 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

224 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

as shown in Equations G-6 and G-7.4lb * in)/(poundforce * s2) m = Mass of the system. G-9) C T = 1 – K Tden * 0. It is determined as shown in Equation G-9. in4 (cm4) Final equation — The final equation.0001 * T meas where KTden = Temperature coefficient for density Tmeas = Measured flow tube temperature. lb/in3 (g/cc) Tube internal area. G-4) 2π ω = 2πf = -----t Temperature correction coefficient (CT) — This coefficient corrects for the effect of temperature on the flow tube stiffness. 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. cycles/second t = Tube period (number of seconds for one cycle of oscillation). (Eq. (Eq. G-3 and G-4 into Equation G-1 and solving for ρf . (Eq. G-1) ωn = k ---m Substitute and rearrange — Equation G-5 is derived by substituting Equations G-2. 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. 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-3) MEI k = ----------3 lt Modal constant Modulus of elasticity. pound-force/inch or lb/s2 (N/m or kg/s2) lb/s2 =(pound-force/in) * gc gc =(386. described by Equation G-2. G-5) ρt A MEI 2 ρ f = ------------------- * t – ---------t 4π 2 l 4 A Af t f where ωn = Natural frequency. in2 (cm2) Tube length. and is entirely independent of the mass flow rate measurement. G-6) MEI C a = ------------------2 4 4π l t A f (Eq.G Density Measurement Coriolis Meter Density Measurement (Eq. second 226 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . rad/s k = Spring constant. (Eq. G-7) ρt A Cb = ---------t Af where ρf ρt Af At lt = = = = = Fluid density. (Eq. shows that the density of the fluid is directly proportional to the period of the tube vibration squared (t2). as described by Equation G-3. (Eq. (Eq. °C where f = Oscillation frequency. Equation G-8. in2 (cm2) Tube cross-sectional area. poundforce/in2 (kPa) Moment of inertia. lb/in3 (g/cc) Tube material density. in (cm) Spring constant (k) — The spring constant depends on the tube geometry and the modulus of elasticity of the tubing material.

D1 and D2. At the factory. which triggers a time measurement over the duration of the tube cycle. RFT9739 signal processing block diagram. K1 and K2. which detects the start and end of each tube cycle. Calibration fluids should be selected that have sufficiently different densities. The sinusoidal voltage signal from one of the pickoff detectors is input to a counter. The tube cycles are gated by the counter. because the natural frequency of the tube vibration is affected by changes in temperature. not Ca and Cb. The time or period over which the tube cycle occurred is obtained from a precision crystal oscillator. Interfaces between the sensor and the electronics include the pickoff detectors.Density Measurement Coriolis Meter Density Measurement G Figure G-2. The electronics is comprised of interfaces to the sensor. This would result in an Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 227 . The microprocessor reads the counter time measurement and uses this value along with the tube temperature and calibration constants to calculate the fluid density. The tube temperature measurement is required. and the respective tube periods. A block diagram of the density measurement components in the transmitter is presented in Figure G-2. the tube will become more elastic. 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. signal processing components. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass of the system has not changed. The density calibration values that are stored in the transmitter are the calibration fluid densities. If the tube temperature increases. the drive mechanism. and outputs to external devices. air and water are used as the calibration fluids. With the two fluid densities (D1 and D2) and their respective tube periods (K1 and K2). and the temperature measuring device (RTD). two simultaneous equations with two unknowns can be solved to obtain Ca and Cb.

) G.06 0. Portions of the following sections are the same as presented in Appendix F. If the tube temperature increases. 0.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Because a Coriolis meter operates like a vibrating spring/mass system. obtained from the RTD. 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. Temperature effect on density measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.02 30 60 90 120 Temperature (°F) 316L Hastelloy C-22 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 228 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .04 0. 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 net flow rate of one or more components in a multi-component mixture can also be determined. is used to correct the natural frequency measurement for temperature related changes in the elastic modulus of the flow tube material. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. peripheral devices are available that provide additional information about the process fluid. mass. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. its density measurement will be affected by changes in tube stiffness. (For example. the flow rate of oil in an oil-water emulsion can be determined. In addition to providing density. The tube temperature. each sensor model and size will behave somewhat differently when fluid properties change. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass Figure G-3.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy increase in the tube period.08 Density error (g/cc) 0. the tube will become more elastic. 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. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly in Section G. page 225. and damping. Due to design variations.1.02 0 -0.

Figure G-4 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. To obtain the error percentage. Pressure effect on density measurement — no pressure compensation. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. However. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. A pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the sensor as possible.00010 -0. diameter.00020 -0. A pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. divide the density error by the operating density and multiply by 100.79% per 100°C change in temperature. which increases the tube frequency. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress Figure G-4. and the density measurement can be corrected. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. The signal from the pressure transducer is input to the RFT9739. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. resulting in a decrease in the tube period and a subsequent decrease in the indicated density. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. The flow tube wall thickness. (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). In bent-tube designs. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. as shown in Equations G-8 and G-9. page 230. 0. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube.26% per 100°C change in temperature. Figure G-3 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s density measurement if no temperature compensation were used.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G of the system has not changed. This would result in an increase in the tube period.00000 -0. The effect of temperature on the density measurement can be characterized. Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms. However. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. page 226. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size.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 influence of pressure on the CMF300 density measurement is an order of magnitude less than it is for the D600. geometry. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed.00010 Density error (g/cc) 0. which automatically compensates for pressure effects using Equation G-10.

G-10) ρ corrected = ρ measured + K Pden * P meas Table G-1. it remains well within specification over its entire rated pressure range. Pressure coefficients for density. The values presented in Table G-1 illustrate that variations in flow tube geometry can entirely eliminate the hoop stress stiffening effect of pressure.000001 –0.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. Figure G-5a and Figure G-5b show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter. and some are negative. Highpressure model (DH300) has no pressure effect.000001 0.0000031 0.5W 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.. Model D300 and DL200 sensors have the greatest pressure effect on density. which has a modified flow tube geometry. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communication.5W 230 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Automatic pressure compensation for density cannot be performed by the RFT9712 transmitter. Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy (Eq.00001 0. the CMF300. Figure G-5a.000006 –0.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. Some of the correction factors are positive. has such a slight density effect that *Standard-pressure model (DS300) only. KPden(g/cc/psig) 0. psig Table G-1 lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the density measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter. Sensor Model D300* and DL200 D600 DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient.00000022 where ρcorrected = Corrected density ρmeasured = Uncorrected meter density indication = Pressure coefficient for density KPden (Table G-1) = Measured pressure under Pmeas flowing conditions.

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

the flow rate effect on density is insignificant. beyond this point the error increases exponentially. 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. K1 and K2 = Represent the measured tube periods determined when the meter is calibrated on air and water.005 Density error (g/cc) 0. however. therefore.000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) 10. and is. The frequency of vibration of the sensor flow tubes is lower when the flow tubes are oriented upward than when they are oriented downward.004 0. 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. all earlier RFT9739 versions use a K3 value.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy where = Determined from Equation G-10.000 8. G-7. The mechanism for this influence is not well understood. This results in an increase in the tube period and a subsequent increase in the density indication.003 0.6 or later. 0. but appears to be related to variations in gravitational forces. respectively. Sensor Orientation If the orientation of the sensor is changed. and lowest when the tubes are oriented downward.000 6. the effect is not linear. The RFT9739 uses a three-point flowingdensity calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density.000 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 232 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Therefore. the K3 value listed in Table G-2 may be used.000 lb/min). (K1 and K2 should not be confused with the constants Ca and Cb presented in Equations G-6. page 226. It is recommended to use this FD value. The K3 algorithm is based on water as the flowing medium. and G-8. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. Figure G-6 illustrates the effect of increasing fluid flow rate on the density measurement of a CMF300. more accurate. ρcorrected The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. however. the density reading is greatest when the tubes are oriented upward. there will be a shift in the meter’s density reading. The influence of fluid flow rate is negligible at low flow rates and increases with increasing flow rate. The magnitude of the effect of fluid flow rate varies from one sensor to the next.000 0 2. Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement — CMF300 with no compensation. If the RFT9739 has software version 3. For older RFT9739 transmitters.000 4. The FD algorithm is based on the measured density of the calibration process fluid. For flow rates less than 50% of the nominal flow rate (the CMF300 nominal flow rate is 5. The effect generally decreases with increasing sensor size. if possible. page 230.001 0.002 0. it uses an FD compensation value. Therefore. rather than the FD value listed in Table G-2. Fluid Flow Rate Increasing fluid flow rate causes the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes to decrease.

sensor flow tubes parallel to the ground) will provide density measurements approximately halfway between the tubes-up and tubes-down density measurements. the measurement accuracy of the meter will begin to degrade. If it exceeds 13 volts DC. This is called drive saturation. sensors are often installed where they are exposed to external vibrations. FD and K3 values. Once drive saturation occurs.0018 0. The impact of changing sensor orientation decreases with increasing sensor size. The meter drive gain reading can be used for determining whether drive saturation is occurring. The sensor will perform better in these types of applications than in those where the gas easily breaks out and accumulates. a common misconception is that they will not function properly in an environment that is subject to vibration. In general. the tube vibration will drop below a measurable level. Additionally. Significant measurement Vibration Because Coriolis sensors operate by vibrating. 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. Based on tests performed with air and water. Testing to fully characterize this influence on all sensor sizes and orientations is still in progress. A point can be reached where the tubes will no longer vibrate at the design amplitude.00038 0. Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas Mixtures of gas and liquid in the sensor affect the density measurement in two ways. yet they provide excellent performance. The drive gain should normally be between 3 and 4 volts DC. etc. even though the maximum power is being applied to the driver.0005 g/cc. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 233 . stratified. the amount of current that can be supplied to vibrate the tubes is limited. well mixed. Due to intrinsic safety limitations. 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. 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 sensors. Once this occurs.000015 not applicable not applicable 0. If the measurement of liquid density is critical. A small amount of gas in the liquid can dramatically impact the overall fluid density.0317 0. creating more of an emulsion. A sensor’s sensitivity to entrained gas is difficult to determine. The combination of gas and liquid will result in a density that is lower than the density of the liquid. fluids with higher surface tension will tend to create a more uniform dispersion of any entrained gas in the fluid. Sensor model D300 D600 DL100 DL200 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 FD 200 50 670 150 230 320 280 K3 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. because gas occupies a large volume relative to its mass.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G Table G-2. the sensor flow tube will stop vibrating at 5 to 15 percent gas by volume. Changing the orientation of a CMF200. severe drive saturation has occurred. the meter is no longer capable of making a measurement. Actually. all efforts should be made to remove gas from the liquid. The transmitter will automatically indicate an error condition when the drive becomes saturated.00018 errors will occur as the tube amplitude decreases. At some point. the combination of gas and liquid dampens out the vibration of the sensor flow tubes.

However. The susceptibility of the meter to vibration will vary from one design to another. known as cross-talk. This problem. 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. 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. and connected piping are isolated. Vibration cannot transfer to sensor. Sensor. Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) ρ = 0. The sensors can transmit enough vibrational energy through the pipeline to excite one another. Table G-3. as illustrated in Figure G-7.0012 g/cc ρ = 0. In severely vibrating pipelines.998 g/cc 106 73 73 39 234 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Sensors of the same size and model operate at very similar frequencies. from the pipeline and the 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.8 g/cc 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 ρ = 0. Mounting for sensor vibration isolation. it might be possible to apply rigid clamps to the piping to change the frequency being transmitted down the pipeline. page 234. Another vibration-related problem is encountered when multiple sensors are installed in the same pipeline. However. Table G-3 presents typical operating frequencies for ELITE and Model D600 sensors. but has been minimized with the ELITE sensors. the sensor should be isolated from the vibration with flexible piping and vibration isolating pipe supports. Typical sensor operating frequencies. is fairly common with Model D sensors. which in some cases can lead to measurement errors. in the event that the pipeline frequency affects the operation of the meter. sensor connections.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Figure G-7. as a unit. 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.

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

Corrosion Figure G-8. which will cause a localized increase in the fluid density. 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. which illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. For additional resistance to corrosion.04 0. the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure. also illustrates the effect of material loss due to corrosion. select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes. additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion.110 0.120 Density error (g/cc) g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 0.10 0. Figure G-8. the impact of corrosion on a Coriolis meter is complicated by the vibration of the flow tubes. A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data. 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.00 0.112 0. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. stresses. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions.108 Wall thickness (in) 236 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22.118 0. However. there will be localized compression of the fluid at the tube wall.114 0. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking. which results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes. Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application.08 Initial wall thickness 0. Once a crack has begun. a crack will initiate at a pit. However. If the velocity of the flow tube wall approaches the velocity of sound in the process fluid. In this type of corrosion.06 0. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials.02 0. 0. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure. your sales representative or the factory for questions about material suitability.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form. Also. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement — ELITE® CMF300 sensor.116 0.

06 inches (the tube will move from peak to peak in onehalf tube cycle) Tube frequency = 160 Hz (equal to approximately 0.) Total displacement = 0. which approximates the flow tube velocity for a Micro Motion meter.6 ft/sec The velocity of sound for gases can be determined from Equation G-12.( Tube Period ) 2 0. Table G-4.03-inch peak displacement).003125 seconds per one-half tube cycle) Total Displacement Tube Velocity = --------------------------------------------------------1 -.2 in/sec = 1.003125 sec = 19. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 237 .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. page 234). (This calculation is quite conservative. is provided below. 0.00625 seconds per tube cycle. 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 operate at low frequencies (less than 160 Hz — see Table G-3. Velocity of sound.06 in = ---------------------------------0. because the vibrating frequency is generally much lower than 160 Hz. Therefore. (Eq. it is very unlikely that velocity of sound influences would create a density measurement error for Micro Motion Coriolis meters. Hydrocarbon product Pentane n-Butane CO2 Propane Velocity of sound* (ft/sec) 598 676 842 857 *Velocity when product temperature is 30°F. The velocity of the Coriolis meter flow tube is approximately 350 times less than the velocity of sound of pentane. A simplified calculation. This phenomenon should not impact Micro Motion meters. and have low tube displacements (less than 0. The velocity of sound in liquids is significantly higher than in gases.

238 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement . . . Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix H Volume Measurement H. . . Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy . . . . Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zero Influences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluid Flow Rate . . Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of mass flow rate 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 .

240 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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. vibration. page 228. and velocity of sound. Thus. 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. In order to understand how the mass flow measurements are made. and flow rate on the volume measurement. flow profile. an increase in temperature results in a decreased volume indication. page 223). page 223. the calculated volume will be affected by all of the parameters that affect the mass and density measurements (described in detail in Appendices F. and G-3.000. and any influence that results in an increase in the indicated density will cause a decrease in the indicated volume. pressure. The influences described below explain how the combination of mass and density influences affect the volume measurement. page 211. viscosity. see Appendix G. density. as shown in Equation H-1. page 205. corrosion. However. refer to Appendix F. and G. page 223. erosion. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. such as: entrained gas.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Because the volumetric flow rate is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. for details concerning other effects. A brief discussion of zero influences is also included. for density. the effect of temperature on density is of larger magnitude than the effect on mass flow rate.Appendix H Volume Measurement H. coating. page 205. The following sections illustrate the impact of temperature. page 205. volumetric flow can be determined. 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 . sensor orientation. From Equation H-1. and G. (Eq. 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. it can be seen that an increase in temperature causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to increase. Refer to Appendices F. Referring back to Figures F-4.1 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement Since Coriolis meters provide independent mass flow and density measurements. H.

1 -0.1 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0 -0.2 0.0 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.4 -0.4 0 20 40 60 Pressure (psig) 80 100 D600 CMF300 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.3 -0.2 -0.3 -0. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters.5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) % error effect based on specific gravity = 1. 2.0 -4. 0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) -0.000 -6. Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation.0 316L Hastelloy C-22 -2.H Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Figure H-1. Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.000 Figure H-3.000 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .1 -0.2 -0.0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0. Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement — CMF300 no compensation. 0.0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Temperature (°F) Figure H-2.

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

244 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

246 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

at a variety of flow rates. page 248.8 0. These data illustrate the repeatability results becoming significantly poorer at higher flow rates.4 0. Shown are typical results for a Model D600 sensor and an RFT9739 transmitter with a 24-inch Compact™ Prover.6 0.Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I. 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.006 1.008 1.992 0.996 0.6 1.004 1. The D600 data was analyzed using the pass grouping method illustrated by Figure 8-9. along with the pass-to-pass repeatability. Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate.012 1.2 1.05%. are shown in Figure I-1.8 1.010 1.002 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.2 0. Thirty prover passes are recommended for this initial group.2. Equation I-1 was then applied to the first 30 proving passes at each flow rate shown in Figure I-1. page 102. The following is an example of how Equation I-1 can be applied. Figure I-1. 1. The results of these two analysis methods are presented in Table I-1. This analysis determined the number of passes per run that provided repeatability of less than 0.998 0.994 0.0 0. for each flow rate. The meter factors for the individual proving passes. In order to use Equation I-1 the meter factors for an initial group of proving passes must be determined.4 1.990 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Repeatability (%) Meter factors Repeatability Flow rate (lb/min) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 247 .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.000 0. Figure I-1 shows proving data from a D600 sensor proved with a 24-inch Compact Prover.0 25000 Meter factor 1.

5.039 5 10 0.067 0. transfer standard proving may be required. the proving duration can be set to any desired length of time. then dividing by the number of passes.605 1. then proving the Coriolis meter against the transfer standard meter. R 248 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .4 5.080 0. page 247). PulsesMIN = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the fewest number of pulses.042 6 3 0. I. Typical results using a Model D600 sensor and RFT9739 transmitter. It was determined that the meter and prover were incompatible at this flow rate.2 3.126 0. The values in Equation I-2 are obtained by performing a series of proving passes. Details of transfer standard proving procedures are presented in Section 3.040 4 3 0. Twenty passes is typically considered to be the practical limit for the number of passes per group.3 2.* 100 Pulses AVG where = Repeatability is given as a percentage (not a decimal) value. PulsesAVG = The average number of pulses per proving pass is obtained by summing the pulses accumulated from all of the proving passes. I-2) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN R(%) = -----------------------------------------------------------.667 The predictions of Equation I-1.3. (Eq. for flow rates of 19. At this flow rate. repeatability is used as the criteria for defining how many proving passes per run are required. the prerun time was only 0. page 247. Number of passes per run. correlate very well with the pass grouping method.45 seconds — below the recommended minimum of 0.139 0. PulsesMAX = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the greatest number of pulses.4 13.153 0.2 Derivation of Equation I-1 The measure of whether a proving is acceptable or not is the proving repeatability. Proving repeatability for volumetric flowmeters is generally calculated as shown in Equation I-2.3 Pass-to-pass repeatability (%) 0.05% could not be obtained within 20 prover passes. In instances such as the one described above. This involves proving the transfer standard meter against the prover.239 0.326 0. Because there are no volume limitations with master meter proving.867 lb/min and less.0 1.299 lb/min.6 1. page 104. proved with a 24” Compact™ Prover (Results from Figure I-1. Issues related to using transfer standard meters and volumetric master meters are discussed in Section 8.05% Passes per run Repeatability from grouped from Passes per run data grouped data from Equation I-1 5 0. where the prover is undersized and adequate repeatability cannot be obtained.038 12 15 0.117 0. The actual test data showed that repeatability of less than 0.049 4 5 0.044 5 5 0.3 2. Repeatability criteria ≤ 0. page 30. it was predicted that 51 proving passes would be required.031 12 10 0. Therefore.019 3 15 0.031 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. At the highest flow rate of 24.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 Table I-1.67 seconds.

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

maximum and minimum are determined from the meter factors for the 30 passes. 250 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the number of pulses cannot be used. I-11) 50 * ( MF MAX – MF MIN ) Passes = -------------------------------------------------------------MF AVG * MF stdev * R 2 A repeatability of R = 0. I-7) Pulses MAX – Pulses AVG z = ------------------------------------------------------------Pulses stdev For a uniformly distributed population. I-12) 1000 * ( MFMAX – MFMIN ) Passes = ------------------------------------------------------------------MFAVG * MFstdev 2 To use Equation I-12. at least 30 proving passes must be performed. The average. I-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN z = -----------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG The formula for the z statistic is then substituted into Equation I-6.05% was substituted into Equation I-11 to provide Equation I-12. I-10) ( Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN ) * 100 Passes = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG * Pulses stdev * R 2 For a meter that measures mass. I-8) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Pulses MAX – Pulses AVG = -----------------------------------------------------------2 Substituting Equation I-8 into Equation I-7 gives the following result: (Eq. Therefore. the following relationship should be true: (Eq. which results in Equation I-11. standard deviation. These values are entered into Equation I-12 and the required number of passes per run is determined.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 (Eq. which results in Equation I-10. (Eq. the meter factor (MF) is substituted in Equation I-10 for the number of pulses. because density variations are not accounted for. (Eq. (Eq.

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

252 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

88 small volume prover 96. 227 accuracy influences flow rate 232 pressure 231 temperature 229 calibration factors 158. See HART Communicator. Installation. 109 volumetric tank prover 81. Meter factor. proving accuracy.Index Page numbers in bold indicate illustrations. 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. 129. 161 flow tube coating 137. 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. HART protocol. ProLink software program. Modbus protocol Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 255 . 97 transfer standard meter 108. 210 temperature coefficient 210 calibration factor xxi output signals 45 digital communications 46 proving calculations inventory 128. See also Damping factor. Response time. A Accuracy. 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. 161 meter factor 136 meter recommendations 133 volume flow rate accuracy 243 Communications. 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.

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 . 22 proving computer features 62 volume measurement 17. 159 zero reading 198 Density averager manufacturers 254 proving procedures density meter 25 transfer standard 31 volume 29 troubleshooting 135 Density factor xxiii. 18. 182 time units 52 volume measurement 18 Coriolis sensor 208 components 225 corrosion 221. 32 prover steel 26 proving calculations density 26. 11. 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. 122 steel pipe prover 87 small volume prover 96 uncertainty 126 volumetric tank proving 81 temperature meter factor calculation 22. 123 field proving 147 flow tube changes 161 inventory calculations 128 laboratory analysis 147 mass measurement 22. 24 volume measurement 17 temperature and pressure measurements 29 thermal expansion 18. 158 density measurement device 64 density proving calculation 155 determining mass meter factor 122. 182 meter factor calculation 73 uncertainty 74. 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. 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. 126 computing proving computer feature 62 density measurement 64. 229 meter factor calculation 20.Index Conversion factor density 156. 236 crosstalk 135 orientation 41 pipe stresses 39 vibration 233 Correction factor 147. 29 mass flow 24. 91 Coriolis master meters 118 gravimetric tank proving 78 small volume prover 103. 141 calculating 156 correcting density reading 146. 230 buoyancy 172. 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. 187 proving 172.

213 repeatability specification 125 F Flow detectors. 147 fluid flow rate 136. 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. 150. 17 recommendations 133. 161 in-line 22 mass measurement 25–27. 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. 237 Density sampling container 26 installation 153 line 147. 53 nominal 202 normal 11 procedures 105 prover size recommendations 90 required number of runs 123 pressure effect on mass 212 proving 5. 203 operating expected 107 maximum xxi. 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. 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. 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 197–199.1 Density meter 4 API standard 153 calibration 65 density measurement device 64 field proving 146. 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. 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. 35 damping 54 mass measurement 22 meter factor calculation 113 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 257 . See Pickoff detectors Flow measurement analog output 48 custody transfer 9.

230. 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. 144 RS-485 47. 230 process fluids 220 sensor mounting 39 system mass 226 temperature 226. 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. 229. 114 pulse scaling factor determination 52 H HART Communicator . 236 density 45. 123 Full-scale flow xxi density factor offset 161 maximum 56. 17. 3 coating 228. 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. 233 zero offset 216 Frequency totalizing device 62. 134 K K-factor xxi. 228. 116 Coriolis meter configuration 113. 237 vibration 218. 121. See Outputs Mass measurement 4. 231 multidrop network Bell 202 48. See also HART protocol. 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 . 241 transfer standard 30 troubleshooting 135–137 velocity of sound 236. 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.Index variation 56 zero offset error 199 zeroing influences 215 Flow tube xxi. 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. 235 corrosion 221. 144 M mA outputs. 113. ProLink software program analog density 145 analog output 48 analog output trim 145 Bell 202 48 density measurement 65.

71. 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. 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. 27. 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. 28 recommendations 159 reproducibility 158 required equipment 79 RFT9739 transmitter 133 small volume prover uncertainty 97 small volume provers 94 volume measurement 29. 72 volumetric flow rate 4. 122 prover volume 4. 161 inventory calculations 129 mass measurement 22. 124 number of proving runs 90. 101 volume measurement 32 reproducibility 126. 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. 247 flow tube changes 137. 112 erosion 90. 85–87. 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 . 27. 123 measurement devices 64 meter proving 10 pressure 136. 136 rezeroing 200 temperature measurement 63 time between provings 12 transfer standard meter 104 trend chart 12.1 flow rate measurement 241 fluid flow rate 136. 243 proving devices 65 proving equipment 25. 161 inventory calculations 128–130 mass xxiii. 122–123. 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. 151 proving instruments 61 proving procedure 26. 32 mass meter factor 122. 100 prover prerun 99 tank volume 83 average 102. 45 volumetric master meter uncertainty 109 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 81. 71 volumetric proving 18 volumetric proving requirements 20 volumetric tank proving 79 Meter factor xxi accuracy Coriolis master meter 111.

117 accuracy 89. 96 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 80 O Operating conditions xxii. 142. 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 . 46. 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. 143 density measurement 26. 208 prover plenum pressure 99 response time 53 zero offset influences 216 sensors xxii. 248 operating frequencies 219. 218 pulse 30. 49 low-flow cutoff 56 recommendations 46 troubleshooting 53 HART 230. 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. 159 sensor orientation impact 233 vibration isolation 235 N NIST density proving 151. 143 transmitter 134 P Pickoff detectors xxi. 152 pipe prover 84 pipe prover uncertainty 86 proving versus calibration 9 small volume prover 92 small volume prover uncertainty 95. 53 Coriolis meters 3 density measurement 225. 89 accumulating pulses 110. 117 RS-485 47. 28 digital 46 frequency 51. 227 low-flow cutoff 56 mass flow measurement 207. 106–108 volumetric tank proving 83 Output 45–57 analog 45. 231 meter 35. 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. 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.Index reproducibility 136 trend charts 12 Modbus protocol communication configuration 47. 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. 113 inventory calculations 129 measuring in mass units 29 meter factor calculation Coriolis master meter 113 pipe proving 85 small volume prover 94. 234 plugging 221 pressure effect density measurement 229–231 mass flow accuracy 212 volume measurement 243 proving passes 102 recommendations 133.

144 calibration 9. 92. 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 . 243 tube stiffness 211 Process conditions xxii. 209 meter zero influences 214 zeroing 197 Pressure coefficient 210. 229 mass flow 212. 100 small volume prover 91. 160 Coriolis meter proving 110. 136 rezeroing 200. 99 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 stationary conventional pipe prover 85 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19. 20 proving computer 61 volume base xxiii meter factor calculation 80. 103 reproducibility 126. 143 connecting to transmitter 145 density measurement density device 65 digital output 46. 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. 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. 57 meter zeroing 197 troubleshooting with 135 using for simulation 53 volume measurement 30 Protocol. 89 accumulating pulses 89 damping 55. See HART protocol. See also HART Communicator calibration 158 communication configuration 46–48. 117 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 master meter proving 106 meter proving 12 proving calculations 29 repeatability 90. 86. 52.1 mass flow measurement 208. Modbus protocol Prover detectors density averaging device 65 density measurement 28 mass measurement 23. 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. 26 optical 94. 95 pulse interpolation 93 volume measurement minimum volume proving 19 prerun xxii. 93 transfer standard proving 30 volume measurement 18 volumetric tank proving 79 Index Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 261 . 3 accuracy 210 analog output 48. 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. 91 prover size recommendations 100 small volume prover 98. 143 density proving 151 meter information 47.

249 number of proving runs 90 262 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 148. 26. 26 predicting 247–250 small volume prover 25. 98 recommendations 134. 150. 94 conventional prover 25. pass accumulating pulses 110. 160 repeatability 125.Index Proving density 149. 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 . 102 number of proving passes 247. 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. 29. 248. 17 mass meter factor 122 meter factor calculation 85. 147 density proving installations 149 procedure 154 recommendations 159 pass 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. 30 Proving technique 35 Coriolis master meter 113 reproducibility 128 volumetric master meter 106 Pycnometer xxiii. 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. 94 proving recommendations 134 volume meter factor 121 Proving method 71. 155 calculations 155 density measurement 146. 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. 29. 117 average meter factors 102 damping factor 111. 153 calibration 161 density factor 156. See also Proving. 94. 158. 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. 249 repeatable output 117 temperature 90. 152. 65 flow rate 71 in-line 71 meter factor uncertainty 125 proving connections 42 volume meter factor 121 volumetric xxii. 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. 160 density measurement 64 density proving density measurement 154 density proving calculations 155 density proving device 65 density proving installations 148.

32 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 83 Reproducibility 126. ELITE sensor. 232. 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. 22. 136. Pickoff sensors T Temperature accuracy 241 coefficient 210 correction coefficient 226 effect density 18. Model D sensor. 160 vibration 218 volume measurement 20. 46 damping 54 density 151 density measurement 65 fluid flow rate 136. 211 small volume prover 94 temperature measurement device 63 volumetric tank proving 79 Index S Sampling systems 4. 127 density factors 158 meter factors 136 Response time analog density 145 Coriolis master meter 111. 160 damping factor prerun duration 56. 213. 142 Sensor. 106 transfer standard proving 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 263 . 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. 228 mass flow 211 prover volume 19 volume 242 zero offset 216 Transfer standard proving 30–32. 214 pressure effect density factor offset 161 density measurement 229. 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. 228 flow rate accuracy 241 meter mass flow accuracy 208. 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. 89. 99 reproducibility 136 tank proving 90 digital density 144 flow measurement 53 pressure measurement 213. See Coriolis sensor. 27. 210.1 poor with leakage 89 pressure devices 152 prover size 90. 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.

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

.

Colorado 80301 Tel (303) 530-8400 (800) 522-6277 Fax (303) 530-8459 Fax (303) 530-8459 ©1998.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. USA Worldwide Headquarters 7070 Winchester Circle Boulder.micromotion. Rev.Visit us on the Internet at www. A recycled paper . All rights reserved P/N 1004732. Inc. Micro Motion.

- Flow_Calibration_Procedure.pdfkfathi55
- Siemens MagFlowgkreugineraj
- G25_Data_Sheet.pdfharry
- Daniel 600Fabian Guzman
- EIL Spec for Instrumentation WorksRatnam Sk
- Steve-Whitmas-mass-meters-1.pdfEdgar Colmenarez
- Fusible Plug Loop Panel1caigithe852456
- Saic-h-2031 Rev 2 (How to Take Dfts Per Sspc-pa2)mbayou
- API Mpms ChaptersElijah John
- BP_Measurement Manual PART1Riadh2012
- Instrproving Coriolis for CustodyChristian Cabrera
- Calibration Reportsrinimullapudi
- 5. QSonicplus_EN05_A20141016(1)Yamzi Andy
- List Standards in Flow Meteringbagusindarto
- NLD-Large LCD Calibration X2Lgeorgemc83
- Process of AccreditationGautam Gupta
- Http Cts.vrespnnava5051
- 11869SRINKAL1999
- fisherhtm64
- August 2002Heryanto Syam
- Training highlight points.docSelvaraj S
- Assessment FormatShankar G
- AprTech11Adelz Zleda
- Test BlocksCarlos Choper
- Tank Calibrationmohamedyoussef1
- Section 10 Rev7-03trungthanhnguyen_83
- Belt Weigher MaintenanceJong Java
- Test Equipment Buyers GuideMojoshe Monashe
- Calibration NdtAnbalagan Renu
- Flowmeter-Product-Line-Overview.pdfVisal Cheng

- HOUSE HEARING, 109TH CONGRESS - THE UNITED NATIONS OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM: THE COTECNA AND SAYBOLT INSPECTION FIRMSScribd Government Docs
- Tmp 3100Frontiers
- As 60270-2001 High-Voltage Test Techniques - Partial Discharge MeasurementsSAI Global - APAC
- tmp4D19Frontiers
- Tmp 1353Frontiers
- AS NZS 1591.1-1995 Acoustics - Instrumentation for audiometry Reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone.pdfSAI Global - APAC
- Tmp 2283Frontiers
- As 1817.3-2002 Metallic Materials - Vickers Hardness Test Calibration of Reference BlocksSAI Global - APAC
- tmp850AFrontiers
- As 5016-2004 Metallic Materials - Conversion of Hardness ValuesSAI Global - APAC
- As ISO 8253.1-2009 Acoustics - Audiometric Test Methods Basic Pure Tone Air and Bone Conduction Threshold AudSAI Global - APAC
- As 1544.4-2003 Methods for Impact Tests on Metals Calibration of the Testing MachineSAI Global - APAC
- As 4250.2-1995 Liquid Hydrocarbons - Dynamic Measurement - Proving Systems for Volumetric Meters Pipe ProversSAI Global - APAC
- As 2162.2-1998 Verification and Use of Volumetric Apparatus Guide to the Use of Piston-operated Volumetric APSAI Global - APAC
- tmp878FFrontiers
- Healdsburg-City-of-Blower-Door-Guided-Air-Sealing-RebateGenability
- Field Artillery Journal - Nov 1946CAP History Library
- As 2883-2000 Analysis of Metals - Procedures for the Setting Up Calibration and Standardization of Atomic EmiSAI Global - APAC
- As NZS 3580.2.2-2009 Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air Preparation of Reference Test AtmospherSAI Global - APAC
- As 4250.4-1995 Liquid Hydrocarbons - Dynamic Measurement - Proving Systems for Volumetric Meters TemperatureSAI Global - APAC
- NASA Facts YF-23 and NASA DrydenBob Andrepont
- tmp4E4BFrontiers
- 110103_Nassau FEB_ASCLD Plan of Remediation_Rev1Newsday
- Horus Vision CATS Calibration & Training System ManualAmmoLand Shooting Sports News
- As NZS CISPR 16.1.5-2004 Specification for Radio Disturbance and Immunity Measuring Apparatus and Methods RadSAI Global - APAC
- As NZS 2891.14.3-1999 Methods of Sampling and Testing Asphalt Field Density Tests - Calibration of Nuclear ThSAI Global - APAC
- As 1289.5.8.1-2007 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Comp Action and Density Tests - DeteSAI Global - APAC
- As 1815.1-2007 Metallic Materials - Rockwell Hardness Test Test Method (Scales a B C D E F G H K N T)SAI Global - APAC
- As NZS 2891.14.2-1999 Methods of Sampling and Testing Asphalt Field Density Tests - Determination of Field DeSAI Global - APAC
- Apollo Experience Report Flight Instrumentation CalibrationBob Andrepont

- UntitledM-NCPPC
- tmpE44BFrontiers
- tmp5EAFrontiers
- tmp9F2Frontiers
- Liquid density rainbowPowerhouse Museum
- tmp9817.tmpFrontiers
- tmpDFA1.tmpFrontiers
- tmp8A3DFrontiers
- tmpBAA5.tmpFrontiers
- tmp7F75.tmpFrontiers
- tmp25B9Frontiers
- tmpAE76.tmpFrontiers
- tmp445A.tmpFrontiers
- UntitledM-NCPPC
- Land Development and Transportation Policies for Transit-Oriented Development in Germany and Italy: Five Case StudiesGerman Marshall Fund of the United States
- As 1289.6.7.3-1999 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Strength and Consolidation TestsSAI Global - APAC
- tmp2439.tmpFrontiers
- tmpA848.tmpFrontiers
- tmp5ACDFrontiers
- tmp71D.tmpFrontiers
- nullM-NCPPC
- As 1289.5.3.2-2004 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Comp Action and Density Tests - DeteSAI Global - APAC
- As 2148-2004 Milk and Liquid Milk Products - Density Hyrometers for Use in Products With a Surface Tension OfSAI Global - APAC
- Army Aviation Digest - Jun 1955Aviation/Space History Library
- As 1289.6.1.3-1998 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Strength and Consolidation TestsSAI Global - APAC
- UntitledM-NCPPC
- UntitledM-NCPPC
- nullM-NCPPC
- SAFC Biosciences Research Report - Commercially Available Serum-Free Insect Media: A Comparison of Sf9 Growth Dynamics and Protein ProductionSAFC-Global
- UntitledM-NCPPC

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading