## 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

.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

xiv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

xviii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

8 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

Location Fluid Proving Co.6196 3/8/98 400 – – – 65 No 73 90 . Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run ABC Company Butadiene XYZ Proving Co.75 60 pulse/lb Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.00% • • • • • • • Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 13 .15% Repeatability 0.0050 1.0075 1.614 6/7/98 450 – – – 92 No 80 90 .6098 9/6/98 410 – – – 93 No 82 89 .6154 5/3/98 440 – – – 85 No 78 88 .6111 Was meter rezeroed? 0.05% • 0.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 Figure 2-1.9925 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 .584.0000 0.0025 1.9975 0.6175 4/5/98 395 – – – 75 No 76 88 .08661 4 Mass Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No. 3.6126 7/5/98 445 – – – 95 No 82 89 .6112 8/2/98 435 – – – 94 No 84 87 . Sample proving trend chart.9950 0. Calibration Factor K–Factor CMF300 123456789 RFT9739 987654321 667.10% 0.

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Figure 3-1 Figure 3-2 Figure 3-3 Figure 3-4 Figure 3-5 Figure 3-6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Mass Proving Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. Minimum mass proving configuration . . . . . . . Maximum Volume Proving Requirements . . . Transfer standard proving configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Volume Proving Requirements . . . Mass proving with a density meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . Mass proving using Coriolis density . . . Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . 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. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer Standard Proving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units . . . . . .1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement. . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . Using a Density Meter at the Prover . Proving Equipment . . . Proving Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . Minimum volumetric proving configuration . . . Meter Configured For Mass Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum volumetric proving configuration . . . . . . . . Proving Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. 6. and must be diverted around the meter. 8. Equation 3-6 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. 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. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. 5. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. illustrates the maximum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. Perform proving calculations. 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. Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. Components have been added to the minimum system to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. page 166 (Appendix A). page 21. page 119. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. provides additional details on proving calculations. 3-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Repeatability(%) = --------------------------------------------------------. 2.* 100 Pulses MIN 20 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 4. 3. 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). and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. If the repeatability is acceptable. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. Proving form A-1. (Eq. 10. 9. 7. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. can be used to record the proving data and perform the proving calculations. Check for leaks. Maximum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-2. 3-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp MF v = -------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor where MFv = Meter factor. Pressure and temperature at the prover is not representative of the conditions at the meter. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. 11. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving.

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

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

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

Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. and shows the calculation steps. 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. Therefore. calculation is shown in Equation 3-8. can be used to record data. The product density during the proving should vary by no more than 0. Then the meter factors for the individual proving runs are calculated as shown in Equation 3-9. Next. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. 11. 7. 24 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 176 (Appendix B). Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. provides additional information on proving calculations. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle.025% of the repeatability specification. Proving form B-1. the repeatability can be based on the number of pulses accumulated. for mass-to-volume proving. the pulse repeatability would not account for variations in product density. 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).* 100 MF MIN Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 6.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. this level of density variation would take up 0. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. 9. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. This where ρp = fluid density under flowing conditions at the prover Section 9.0002 g/cc. not the accumulated pulses. (Eq. However.8 g/cc. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. Based on a fluid with a density of 0. Before calculating the meter factor. 3-8) MF MAX – MF MIN Repeatability(%) = ----------------------------------------. the repeatability should be based on the meter factor for the individual provings. This leaves only a 0. page 119. A look-up table or an equation is used to obtain the density of the fluid from the recorded pressure and temperature. (Eq. and the repeatability is based on the maximum and minimum meter factors from the runs. 8. the product density must first be determined. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. If the product density were to vary during the proving.025% repeatability allowance for the meter and the rest of the proving system. the pulse repeatability may be unacceptable. the Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. 10. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are determined from Equation 3-9. when performing a mass-tovolume proving. For volumeto-volume proving. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. Perform proving calculations.

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

(Eq. The density meter must be enabled. While the meter is being proved. to ensure the density factor is repeatable. Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. as shown in Equation 3-10. (Eq. 5. provides additional information on proving calculations. 26 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. the density reading from the density meter is recorded along with the other proving data. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving pass or run. After the density factor has been determined. Refer to Section 11. is used for determining the density meter’s density factor. Valve V11 is still used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. page 146. it must be enabled. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. Proving form B-1. 3-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MF m = --------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses --------------------------------- K–Factor Section 9. and V9. For safety reasons valve V8 would need to be opened before closing valves V10 and V9. Density proving form C-1. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. page 119. This process is repeated two to three times. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. V10. 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.2°C. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. 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. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. for a complete description of this process. it is applicable to any density meter. are described below: 1. page 176 (Appendix B). The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the density meter’s density measurement during the proving run. if required.) Once conditions have stabilized. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated as shown in Equation 3-11. This will either be obtained from the density meter or the density averager. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. If the optional density averager is used. This is accomplished by opening valves V7. the system is returned to normal operation by opening valve V8 and closing valves V10 and V9. can be used to record data. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. 3. Therefore. and shows the calculation steps. page 186 (Appendix C). (Figure 3-4 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. 6. the repeatability value is calculated by using the meter factor. a density sample is collected and the density meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. 4. Care should be taken to ensure that flashing or cavitation does not result from dropping the pressure. If the fluid is expansive. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors and the density meter’s density measurement output. the density meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined. beyond those described beginning on page 23. page 25.4.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement using a density meter at the prover. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. Although form C-1 specifies that it is for proving the Coriolis meter density. 2. Valve V11 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. page 24). which are depicted in Figure 3-4. 7. An additional calculation is also performed: the determination of the density meter’s density factor.

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

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

page 119. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement by using its pulse output to indicate volume. beyond those described in Section 3. provides a more detailed discussion of proving calculations. The advantages of this approach are: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 29 . page 26. the Coriolis meter pulse output must be reconfigured to volume measurement using a Rosemount HART ® ® Proving in Volume Units/ Measuring in Mass Units Another alternative for performing the proving using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement is to configure the meter for volume measurement during the proving process. is used to convert the Coriolis meter density to prover conditions as shown in Equation 3-13. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined (Step 3. Density proving form C-1. The Coriolis meter’s density reading and density factor are used in this equation. and perhaps adjusted. 3-12) Density from Density Sample DF = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density Reading 1. Established volume proving procedures can be used (as described in Section 3.1. page 186 (Appendix C). Before the proving is initiated. the same equation that was used for the density meter at the prover. 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. page 17. The disadvantages of this approach are: 1. The volume measurement obtained from the Coriolis meter will integrate any density variations. Alternately. then return the configuration to mass measurement for normal measurement. is used to determine the density factor. Prior to proving the meter. Section 9.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. the meter’s K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. page 17). 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. page 28). because the meter is continuously sampling the process fluid density. Proving form B-1. (Eq. Equation 3-11 can be used as long as the process conditions at the Coriolis meter and the prover are the same. except the density averager is entirely eliminated. page 24). Proving Equipment The equipment required is the same as shown in Figure 3-5. page 176 (Appendix B).1. The Ctl and Cpl correction factors are determined from API MPMS lookup tables. The meter configuration parameters must be accessed. 2. To ensure the product inventory is not compromised during the proving. 2. the density at the Coriolis meter must be converted to the prover conditions by using Equation 3-13. and form C-2. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. the repeatability is calculated by using the meter factor. and the meter must be changed from mass to volume measurement during proving. and back to mass measurement after proving. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated using Equation 3-11. 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. page 28. and shows the calculation steps. page 187. are described below: 1. can be used to record data. (Eq. 2. If this is not the case. a separate density averager is not required. The Coriolis meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. and then changed back to the original value when it is returned to mass measurement. If the fluid density varies during the proving.

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

should be followed to prove the turbine meter. by activating the twochannel pulse counter to accumulate pulses from both meters.1. density meters and density averagers are not included. It is important that the turbine meter be proved at the same flow rate as the Coriolis meter. illustrates the equipment requirement for performing a transfer standard proving. Refer to Section 3. The procedures described in Section 3.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving 3 Figure 3-6. 3. for additional equipment requirements. For transfer standard proving. Requirements for using transfer standard for proving Coriolis meter. are presented below: 1. page 17. however. page 22. and Section 3.2. 2. The unique items required for a transfer standard proving are: 1. A volume meter factor (MFv) is determined for the turbine meter. page 31. 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 .2. Proving Equipment Figure 3-6. page 17. temperature and flow rate are recorded while the meter is being proved. The Coriolis meter is then proved against the turbine meter. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in performing a transfer standard proving. beyond those described Section 3. page 17.1. Flow Sensor V2 V1 V3 Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Prover detectors 2-channel pulse counter Prover loop For transfer standard proving. these components may be required. Then the transfer standard meter is used immediately to determine the meter factor for the Coriolis meter. against the prover. A series of three to five proving runs are performed. the uncertainty associated with changing process conditions is eliminated. Additionally. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. The pressure. Transfer standard proving configuration. A fast response turbine meter 2. This method can be used for a Coriolis meter configured for volume or mass measurement. Any changes in the flow rate may affect the turbine meter’s meter factor. The proving duration should be between one and two minutes. 4. A two-channel pulse counter. additional items such as bypass loops. the meter factor for the transfer standard meter is determined at actual operating conditions. Only the minimum equipment requirement is shown. and Section 3. the turbine meter must first be proved. page 22.1. 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.

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

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

34 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The RFT9739 transmitter is preferred over the RFT9712.) Pressure compensation for CMF200 and CMF300 sensors is also recommended for applications in which the pressure varies by more than ±150 psig. The preferred devices for custody transfer applications are ELITE® sensors with RFT9739 transmitters. Use high-pressure sensors only in applications for which there are no suitable ELITE or standard-pressure Model D sensors available. an ELITE CMF300 would be a better choice than the D300. because of its highly accurate density measurement and temperature stability. their sensitivity and zero stability are lessened. A deviation in the flow rate measurement of as little as 0. Because ELITE sensors and pressure compensated D600 sensors are primarily recommended for use with RFT9739 transmitters in custody transfer applications. there was no ELITE sensor that would cover the flow range of the D600 sensor. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 35 . all ELITE sensors include secondary pressure containment. Because they are fabricated using a very thick-walled sensor tube. the meter used should be of the highest accuracy available to minimize any errors in the inventory measurement. The meter selected for custody transfer should be as immune as possible to process and ambient influences. refer to page 212.1% can result in a substantial product accounting error over a period of time. At the time this document was written. ELITE sensors have the best flow and density measurement accuracy of the Micro Motion sensor product offering. the rest of the discussion on meter outputs and proving techniques focuses on these devices. the flow and density measurements of Model D300 and D600 sensors have a significant pressure effect. The RFT9739 employs an explosionproof housing for hazardous area installations. (For more information about pressure effect.4 Recommended Meters for Custody Transfer For custody transfer applications. High-pressure Model D sensors are the least suitable for custody transfer applications. 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 and pressure compensation. and is available in a rack-mount version for safe area locations. it should be pressure compensated. For applications in which the pressure does not remain constant. If a D300 or D600 sensor is used in an application where the pressure varies by more than ±15 psi. For the purposes of custody transfer.) In addition. which can be beneficial in hazardous areas.

36 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

38 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

to allow zeroing of the meter. a bypass loop around the sensor may be required. liquids and slurries should be pumped upward through the sensor. or allows it to be entirely drained of fluid. the sensor should be oriented with the tubes (or case) pointed 5. because condensation can accumulate in the sensor tubes. When measuring liquids. This quantity can then be added to the meter inventory. product will not be accounted for during the bypass operation. avoid installing the sensor at a high point in the pipeline.5 Coriolis Meter Installation Recommendations Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing 5.3 Provisions to Allow Meter Zeroing Valves for stopping flow through the Coriolis sensor are required. If the sensor is located in a pipeline that has significant flow pulsations. Figure 5-2 illustrates recommended sensor orientations. or in the “flag” position (mounted in a vertical run of pipe). a block valve located downstream of the sensor is necessary. and pockets of liquid in gas. Any orientations will be successful if the sensor tubes remain full of liquid. the flow of fluid cannot be stopped easily. Gas Measurement For gas measurement. avoiding pockets of gas in liquids. 40 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Downward flow can result in incomplete filling of the sensor if there is insufficient back pressure. or in the “flag” position (mounted in a vertical run of pipe) with fluid flowing upward through the sensor. 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. To prevent accounting lapses during the bypass operation. or the process fluid expands when flow is halted. upward. up or down. because gas can accumulate in the sensor tubes. to prevent liquid from accumulating in the sensor tubes. The meter must be zeroed when it is first installed. In many pipeline applications. Liquid Measurement For liquid measurement. downward.2 Sensor Flow Tube Orientation The sensor should be oriented in a position that keeps it full of process fluid. and may require rezeroing once it is brought into service. When measuring gas. 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). the sensor can be oriented with the tubes (or case) pointed upward. it is preferable to have shut-off valves located both upstream and downstream of the sensor to block it in during zeroing. At a minimum. a meter can be placed on the bypass line. Vertical Pipeline If the sensor is mounted in a vertical pipeline. the sensor should not be installed at a low point in the pipeline. If a bypass is used. Therefore. Gases may flow in either direction. checking the meter zero is an essential diagnostic tool. When analyzing the performance of a Coriolis meter.

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 .

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

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

44 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

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

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. Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic. VF+ 15V 2. 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.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output Figure 6-1a.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 . RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. Resistance is added to decrease input voltage to pulse counting device. RFT9739 open collector frequency schematic.

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

Use whatever time conversion is appropriate. as shown in Equation 6-9.0.6 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. For example. (Eq. the K-factor must be calculated by hand. 6-8) Frequency Setting K–Factor = ------------------------------------------------------. the K-factor is calculated and stored in a register. new frequency and flow rate settings must also be determined. the meter should be scaled to produce the greatest number of pulses allowable per unit of mass that flows through the sensor.000 Hz). 52 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 6-9) Frequency Setting Flow Rate Setting = ----------------------------------------------------. then select Frequency output. which can be viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. For RFT9712 transmitters and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3.* t Flow Rate Setting where t = time units conversion factor The time units conversion factor will vary from one application to the next. because there are 60 seconds per minute.0 and higher. select Config outputs. 2. and the flow rate setting is in flow units per minute.* 60 (sec/min) Flow Rate (lb/min) If the K-factor needs to be changed. Determine the maximum allowable frequency allowed by the pulse counting device (cannot exceed 10. open the Configure menu and choose Transmitter Outputs.000 Hz. (Eq. Input frequency restriction for the proving counter must be kept in mind when scaling the frequency output from the meter. The time units conversion factor (t). The maximum scalable frequency output is 10. Equation 6-8 can be rearranged to determine the appropriate frequency/flow rate settings for a desired K-factor setting.* t K–Factor To provide the greatest amount of resolution. • To view the K-factor using a HART Communicator. The frequency output can be configured to produce a selected number of pulses for every unit of mass or volume that the meter measures. using Equation 6-8. but it can be overranged to 15. because it is capable of being scaled to a user-selected value. the frequency setting unit of measure is Hz (or pulses per second). • To view the K-factor using Prolink software. When there is no flow. as shown in the following example: Frequency ( pulse/sec ) K–Factor = -------------------------------------------------------------. If field adjustment of the K-factor is required the following procedure should be used: 1. is 60. For RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. Determine the maximum operating flow rate. go to the Detailed Setup menu.000 Hz. the Coriolis meter frequency output will be 0 Hz. therefore.

the microprocessor The actual update time will vary from one meter to the next. page 54. Calculate the K-factor from Equation 6-8. Whereas turbine meters and PD meters produce pulses as their primary measurements. therefore. using the values determined from steps 1 and 2.1 and 15. The total is stored in a register. not pulse based. The frequency/pulse output is derived from the digital measurement performed by the microprocessor.000 Hz. changes in the density of the process fluid will also change the frequency of operation. The fluid that flows through the meter over a set time interval is measured and totaled. The higher the fluid density. a simulation test can be performed. Based on the frequency scaling. using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. but can be scaled by the user. the Coriolis meter K-factor could be more precisely referred to as a “pulse scaling factor. Counters that are controlled by the microprocessor take four ∆t samples from the pickoffs during every tube cycle. This signal can be used to verify that the frequency/pulse output is interfacing properly with the prover counter.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 3.025 seconds. The typical meter operates at 80 Hz. because the number of pulses per unit of measured mass is not a constant value. Coriolis meters produce a time difference (∆t) between the right and left pickoff detectors as their primary measurement. the update time of the flow rate measurement also depends on the damping factor that has been set in the transmitter. The update time of the ∆t measurement depends on the natural frequency of the tube vibration. calculates the average ∆t. 6. calculate a new flow rate setting using Equation 6-9 (which is a variation of Equation 6-8). The microprocessor and frequency/pulse circuitry operates in the following fashion. Use the rounded K-factor value for subsequent proving calculations. the microprocessor determines how many pulses Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 53 . rather than a constant. Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output To verify proper operation of the meter’s frequency/pulse output. 6. Table 6-1. If desired.4 Additional Flow Measurement Information In order to better understand the way Coriolis meters process and output the flow rate measurement. because sensors operate at different frequencies — smaller sensors operate at higher frequencies. 4. In addition. To avoid confusion. Using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. there are several concepts that must be introduced: • Response time/damping • Low-flow cutoff • Meter zero reads in the total of eight ∆t samples. In addition. the digital value is capable of updating as fast as every 0. round down the calculated K-factor to a convenient integer quantity. Enter the maximum allowable frequency and the calculated flow rate into the transmitter. the lower the frequency of operation of the meter. the frequency/pulse output from the meter can be set to any desired value between 0. Confusion often results among those who are accustomed to proving turbine and PD meters. Using the rounded K-factor and the maximum allowable frequency.” which indicates the value is a variable. larger sensors operate at lower frequencies. 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. then resets the counters. 5. presents typical operating frequencies for a variety of sensors. The sampling of the ∆t measurement from the sensor pickoffs is dependent on the tube frequency. Every two tube cycles.

Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 ρ=0. For a better understanding of these concepts. The user-specified RFT9739 damping value can be varied from 0 to 1638. the dotted line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. the graph in Figure 6-3 illustrates how damping affects the reaction of the Coriolis meter to changes in flow rate. Localized flow fluctuations and flow noise.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Table 6-1. Using a damping value of less than 0. a value of 0. resulting from flow pulsations and fluid turbulence characteristics.4.8 g/cc 139 135 110 76 76 41 ρ=0. In the graph in Figure 6-3. For process control applications. so internal microprocessor damping is available to average this signal over time and provide a more uniform output. Basically. This value is a filter coefficient. results in a slight lag between an update in the digital flow rate and an update in the frequency output. the solid line represents the actual flow rate.2 uses second order filtering. without affecting overall measurement accuracy. Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy Although using damping is recommended for smoothing out the raw signal from the meter. turbine meters and PD meters have significant inertia.1 incorporates first order filtering. resulting in output signals that have inherent mechanical averaging. In particular. In contrast.8. The lower the tube frequency. For an instantaneous change in flow rate. The RFT9739 employs a selective digital software filter to accomplish this. A damping value of 0 will result in no filtering being applied.1 54 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The purpose of this damping is to filter out flow noise or the effects of rapid changes in flow rate. The microprocessor keeps track of the number of pulses output versus the total in the register. which is used to convert the meter’s digital flow rate signal to a frequency output. and deviations are accounted for and adjusted for in the next time interval.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 need to be output to correspond to the amount of fluid measured by the meter. the raw flow measurement signal from a Coriolis meter exhibits significant variation. the response time characteristics of the meter can lead to problems with undersized in-line field provers.1 is generally not recommended because no filtering is applied. so their mechanical sensing elements tend to dampen out small scale fluctuations in flow. Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. are sensed by the meter and this information is reflected in the meter’s output signals. and any value over 0. and is continually being adjusted to provide proper accounting of the total fluid flow through the meter.1 seconds. the longer it will take for the digital values to be updated. The standard RFT9739 damping setting from the Micro Motion factory is 0. Therefore. damping is used to provide averaging of the signals over a longer time base before updating the digital values. the frequency output will lag the change in the digital flow rate by approximately 0. The signal processing circuitry. the frequency output of the meter is a reflection of the total flow measured by the meter. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the input. The flow sensor is extremely responsive to the dynamics of the fluid flowing through the vibrating tubes. it can lead to problems for some types of measurements.0012 g/cc 150 157 130 87 87 55 ρ=0.

by applying it. For the example shown in Figure 6-3. In contrast. The time between events 2 and 3 is the pulse accumulation period.8 damping value would result in the determination of a meter factor with a value less than 1.1 damping 0.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 damping factor. For the 0. Duration of the prover prerun. Event 1 is the launching of the prover ball or the prover piston. However. Event 2 is the first measurement detector switch.8 damping factor (dashed line). Coriolis meter response during proving. In this example.8 damping factor results in an over-registration of counts by the prover counter.8 damping factor. The overall meter measurement is not in error. because the meter will be indicating a higher flow rate than the actual flow rate during the beginning of the pulse accumulation period. Figure 6-3. Event 3 is the second measurement detector. At event 2. which is a factor of the prover volume and the fluid flow rate during the prerun.1 damping factor (dotted line) and 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. At event 1. a 0. This meter factor would then be applied to the meter indication to correct its output. which depends on the transmitter damping factor and the sensor tube frequency.1 damping factor. The danger of this scenario occurring depends primarily on two factors: 1. pulse accumulation from the meter is halted. but it takes the meter some time to make up for the discrepancy between the actual flow rate and the meter indication. Actual flow rate 0. The meter response time. At event 3. the meter indication is being adjusted to an incorrect value. the meter is actually measuring correctly. and the dashed line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. 2. the launched object introduces additional pressure drop. pulses from the meter begin to be accumulated by the prover counter.000. note the difference in flow indication between the meter with a 0. which results in a reduction in the flow rate through the piping system.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 . using the 0. The time between events 1 and 2 is the prover prerun. The applied meter factor is in error.

a minimal amount of damping is recommended to average out some of the flow-induced noise. or an RFT9739 transmitter with software version lower than 3. page 195. which eliminates the need for removing the lowflow cutoff.8. 56 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . to provide fast response time. The analog low-flow cutoff is unaffected by the digital low-flow cutoff. and details on assessing the need for rezeroing the meter. and the internal digital totalizers will stop counting. In order to use the factory standard damping factor of 0. should be employed. The meter’s flow rate reading can be viewed with any compatible device that communicates digitally with the transmitter. under non-flowing conditions. must be determined. The key is that the meter should respond as quickly as possible to variations in flow rate. The only problem associated with using a low damping value of 0. a low-flow cutoff For the meter zeroing procedure. To view the meter reading under no-flow conditions. 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. due to process variations. Flow Rate Another consideration is flow rate variation while the meter is being proved. Using a larger damping factor will require a longer prerun time. The standard flow cutoff setting is 0. higher or lower values can be programmed into the transmitter as needed. a “live zero” register can be viewed.1 is the flow rate output from the meter will have a greater degree of variation. For an RFT9739 with software version 3. To prevent this low-level flow from being indicated or totalized. The remaining ∆t represents the “true” mass flow rate. However. This process is called “zeroing” the meter. Therefore. refer to Appendix E.1. a prerun time of approximately 4 seconds will be required. the baseline offset between the pickoffs. If the flow rate drops below the low-flow cutoff value.0 or higher. The zero value (∆tzero) that is determined is subtracted by the transmitter from all subsequent time difference (∆tflow) measurements. If the flow rate falls below the low-flow cutoff value. the frequency output will go to 0 Hz. Meter Zero As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. 6-10) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) Meter Accuracy Although meter response time issues can create difficulties in meter proving. A damping factor larger than 0. the meter’s flow rate indication will go to zero.0.67 seconds. The HART Communicator is most commonly used for this task. The low-flow cutoff value for frequency/pulse output is the same as the digital low-flow cutoff value. Low-Flow Cutoff Due to inherent variability in the signals from the pickoff detectors.8 should not be used when proving meters with in-line provers. the flow rate during proving should not fluctuate by more than ±10% during the proving run. If the flow rate changes at the end of the proving run. the same type of errors in the meter factor determination will result.05% of the sensor’s maximum full-scale flow rate. it should be kept in mind that the accuracy of the meter is unaffected by changes in damping factor. (Eq. to limit meter factor errors.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 low-flow cutoff must be set to zero when using an RFT9712 transmitter. The damping factor should be set to 0. and can be set independently. even when there is no flow going through the sensor. However. Refer to Equation 6-10 for the mathematical implementation of the meter zero. a prerun time of 1 second would be more conservative. which may make it difficult to read a stable flow rate from the meter. there will generally be a low-level flow indication from the meter.

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

58 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

60 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

These proving computers will initiate the proving run. • The ability to bring in density from an external density meter as an input frequency. a digital signal. Refer to Section 8. Features to look for in a proving computer are: • A computer that is capable of performing volume-to-mass proving calculations. calculate meter factors and repeatability. These features make proving computers the preferred method for proving. page 91. A computational device is required for a small volume prover to perform the pulse interpolation calculations. the more reliable the average density reading will be. Companies that manufacture small volume provers often also supply proving computers. 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. or an analog signal. required for sufficient accuracy when proving with smaller volumes. density. and produce reports that can be output to an appropriate printer. This list is not all-inclusive. They are not typically used with portable proving systems. automatically read pressures. 7. for more information about small volume provers. or a calculated density • A computer that has enough input ports to acquire all of the necessary temperature. pressure. The more samples that are taken. Flow computer manufacturers also commonly provide a product with proving capability. • The ability to sample a number of density readings over the proving run and provide an average density. accumulate the pulses from the meter.1 Proving Computer Many companies manufacture proving computers or flow computers. which can be used to automate the proving process. The computer inputs must be compatible with the instrumentation outputs. One disadvantage of flow computers is that they are generally dedicated to a single meter or several meters and are used in conjunction with a stationary prover. by way of a density input.4. temperatures and densities. page 251.7 • • • • • Proving Instrumentation Requirements When proving a Coriolis meter. The main advantage of a proving computer is that it eliminates errors associated with using look-up tables and performing calculations by hand. and does not imply Micro Motion’s recommendation of the devices listed. and frequency measurements. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 61 .

The types of devices commonly available for accomplishing this task are described below. inputs are provided for two meters. They will display the total number of pulses accumulated from the meter during a proving run.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pulse Counting Device • The ability to sample and average temperature and pressure to compute the Cts. One of the key components in a manual proving system is the pulse counting device. This feature can also be applied to conventional provers if desired. To initiate a proving.2 Pulse Counting Device The majority of proving applications involve acquiring all of the measurement data manually and performing hand calculations.3. 7. These devices are commonly used for tank proving applications. Dual-Channel Proving Counters Dual-channel proving counters operate in the same manner as single channel proving counters. Single-Channel Proving Counters Single-channel proving counters are used with conventional provers. These devices will use the meter’s K-factor to compute and display the mass or volume measured by the meter. Ctl and Cpl correction factors • The ability to accept a 10. They can be used to prove two meters simultaneously. they are used for master meter proving where the master meter and meter to be proved are both connected to the counter. More commonly. single frequency input from a meter. The pulse counting device must be capable of accepting the frequency output signal from the transmitter. The voltage level from the proving detector switches are used to initiate the accumulation of pulses from the meter. and performing a pulse interpolation calculation.000 Hz frequency input signal • If a small volume prover is being used. They will accept a 62 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 49. Details on the characteristics of this output signal are presented in Section 6. which is used to accumulate pulses from the meter during the proving run. the computer must be capable of performing dual-chronometry time measurement. Frequency Totalizers Frequency totalizers that have computational capability and a display. a button is pushed and pulses are accumulated from both meters simultaneously. as in cases where pay-and-check meters are used. Cps. After a prescribed amount of time the button is pushed again and the counter stops accumulating pulses from the meters. however.

5 °F (±0. For determination of corrections for the pressure effect on the process liquid at the prover (Cplp). In general. a temperature measurement accuracy of ±2. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. Experience with the specific process fluid will be necessary to establish requirements for pressure measurement precision. The two most common means of measuring temperature are RTDs and precision thermometers.1°F (0.5°F would be required. the required temperature measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in temperature. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover (Cpsp) to less than ±0. pressure variations have a much lower relative impact than temperature on both the prover steel and process fluid density. A pressure transducer is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current.4 Pressure Measurement Device Pressure measurement is required for closedvessel volumetric tank provers and pipe provers. the required pressure measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in pressure. to correct for the influence of pressure on the prover volume.05 °C) is used when proving meters. The requirements for pressure measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor. These devices generally use a thermowell inserted in the process fluid. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 63 . The two most common pressure measurement devices used for proving are diaphragm pressure transducers and bourdon tube pressure gauges. Temperature measurement might also be required to correct for the influence of temperature variations on the density of the process fluid.25 °C). Generally.01%. a pressure measurement accuracy of ±100 psi would be required. A pressure gauge is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover.2 bar). Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. 7. A thermometer is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover.Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7 7. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. a thermometer with a resolution of 0. to correct for the thermal expansion of the prover steel. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover (Ctsp) to less than ±0. It is commonly required that the pressure measurement be accurate to ±3 psi (±0. For determination of corrections for the thermal expansion of the process liquid at the prover (Ctlp). The thermometer resolution should be no greater than ±0. It may also be necessary to correct for the influence of pressure variations on the density of the process fluid. The requirements for temperature measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor.01%.3 Temperature Measurement Device Temperature measurement is required for volumetric tank and pipe provers. A heat conductive fluid is placed inside the thermowell to transfer heat to the RTD or thermometer. An RTD or similar device is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations.

0001 g/cc. Accuracy depends on instrument accuracy and equation accuracy. The on-line density devices have the advantages of providing a continuous output signal that represents the actual flowing density. a means is required for determining the density of the product at the prover. 64 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . For the highest precision. However. it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. • On-line density from the Coriolis meter. The device being used for determining density should have an accuracy of at least ±0. All of the other methods require taking a fluid sample and determining the density of the sample. or some other sampling method. correction factors would then be required to correct the density back to the process conditions.0005 g/cc for stainless steel. In addition it may be difficult to maintain the sample at the same temperature and pressure as the process fluid in the pipeline. can be used. Because the product volume will change with changing temperature and pressure. accurate to ±0. with an accuracy of ±0. When performing on-line density measurements. the calculation method for well defined products. This may create errors in the density determination.5 Density Measurement Device If the meter is configured for mass measurement.0001 g/cc.0001 g/cc. This method is generally limited to products of known composition that have been well characterized for the influence of pressure and temperature on product density.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7. Also. the light-ends will escape to the atmosphere and cause a deviation in the sample density from the true product density. and the on-line density determination devices are the most practical.) 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. • On-line density from a separate density meter mounted at the prover. accurate to ±0. The Coriolis meter and the prover must be close enough to one another that the density at the Coriolis meter is representative of the density at the prover. accurate to ±0. • Hydrometer. • Sample and laboratory density determination.0005 g/cc. can be used. • Pycnometer. The hydrometer technique requires a fluid sample to be taken from the process pipeline. this device will generally require a slipstream to be pulled from the process pipeline. Proper sampling practices are vital to ensure the sample is representative of the process fluid. (A Coriolis meter mounted at the prover. and a volumetric prover is used.001 g/cc.0001 g/cc for NiSpanC. It is difficult to obtain samples that will represent the actual fluid density during the proving runs. or additional temperature and pressure corrections will be required. if the sample contains light-ends and is not properly sealed. accurate to ±0.0005 g/cc. ±0. The following methods are available to determine the process fluid density: • Calculation of density from pressure and temperature measurements. and can be monitored while the meter is being proved. Of the methods described above. or some other sampling method. Hydrometers generally do not have sufficient accuracy to be used for mass to volume proving applications. accurate to ±0. which raises concerns about proper sampling technique. an on-line density meter made of NiSpanC. which will be used specifically for density measurement.

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

66 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

the volume will be correct. Mass (Coriolis) master meters Table 8-1 indicates the traceability of the various proving methods back to a fundamental measure. There are disadvantages in using a weigh tank. Small volume (Compact) provers 5. based in part on which have the most uncertainty associated with them. If the meter is being used for volume measurement. page 72).8 Flow Rate Proving Devices The proving methods listed below are discussed in this section. Gravimetric proving is the preferred method of proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement. if the mass flow and density calibrations are proved. the only means currently available for accomplishing this is with some type of weigh tank. Traceability of proving methods to a fundamental measure. Table 8-1. Volumetric transfer standards or master meters 6. Proving Method Gravimetric (weigh scale) tank Volumetric tank Conventional pipe Small volume(SVP) Volumetric master measure Coriolis master meter Prover Calibrated Against Certified weights Weights and density or Volumetric field-standard test measure Volumetric field-standard test measure Volumetric field-standard test measure Conventional or small volume prover Gravimetric tank Type of Standard Primary Secondary or tertiary Tertiary Tertiary Quaternary Secondary 8. but pipe provers are volumetric devices. primarily related to handling the fluid in the tank.1 Gravimetric Tank Proving Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving the Coriolis meter’s mass measurement. the simplest approach is to prove the meter’s volume measurement directly against a volumetric prover. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 71 . Therefore. Because a Coriolis meter is capable of being configured for mass or volume measurement. If the meter is being used to measure mass. page 15. Volumetric tank proving 3. or a tanker truck (see Figure 8-1b). from the most preferred method to the least preferred method. 1. A gravimetric proving system employs a tank placed on a weigh scale (see Figure 8-1a. which is filled and then taken to a truck scale. Gravimetric tank proving 2. Proving procedures for conventional pipe provers. Conventional pipe provers 4. The volume measurement is calculated from the independent mass flow and density measurements. However. small volume provers and transfer standards are described in Section 3. These methods are listed in order. In-line proving devices such as pipe provers would be preferred from a product handling perspective. there are more options available for proving these devices than for turbine or PD meters. the prover volume measurement must be converted to mass by determining the density of the process fluid in the prover.

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

072 0.0 1. or (2) the process fluid being measured. the process fluid. page 181 (Appendix B). Return line must be isolated so as not to affect the scale reading The only instrumentation required is a display or pulse counting device.9 0.3 1.0023 at sea level. Therefore. (Eq.7 0.0019 1.0011 1. can be used for recording data and performing the gravimetric proving calculations. The scale is calibrated with the metal weights. Fb 1.0005 1. when calibrating the scale.0 0. If the scale were only being used to measure items of the same density as the metal weight.0005 1. The 100 lbs of water is subject to a much larger upward buoyant force than the 100 lb weight. Correction % 0. Buoyancy Correction Buoyancy correction is necessary to account for the scale being calibrated with metal weights.0007 1. ρ fluid Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 73 .0006 1. Buoyancy correction factors.0005 1.0016 1. for determining the quantity of fluid measured by the meter.0009 1.2 1.060 0. 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-6.8 1. and the object displacing the air is either (1) the metal weight.105 0.8 0. the buoyancy correction is a calculation that employs the ratios of the densities of air.0009 1. the fluid being displaced is air.094 0. the scale reading is adjusted to match the weight of the certified weights. a buoyancy correction factor (Fb) is applied to the scale’s reading.0012 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. and the buoyant force is inherently calibrated out.7 1.9 1.0007 1. To compensate for this effect.1 1. Essentially. (Eq.045 0. but being used to measure a fluid with significantly different density than the weights. 8-2) ρ air 1 – ---------------- ρ weight Fb = ------------------------------ρ air 1 – -----------. and the weights. no correction would be required.048 0. 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. and Table 8-2 presents calculated buoyancy correction values for a range of fluid densities at sea level. The displacement of fluid results in the fluid exerting an upward buoyant force on the object. Table 8-2.0014 1.5 1.0006 1. when proving the Coriolis meter. resulting in the scale registering a lower reading for the water than its actual mass.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).056 0.135 0.0008 1.4 1. A 100 lb weight displaces a much smaller volume than 100 lbs of water. Equation 8-2 is used to determine buoyancy.065 0. Fluid Density g/cc 2. For gravimetric proving.185 0.071 0.052 0.119 0. The difference is important when a product of different density is weighed.157 0.6 0.5 Note: All values Buoyancy Correction Factor.085 0.6 1.226 Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor for gravimetric proving is determined from Equation 8-1.

(Eq.5.01%. Total error is calculated using Equation 8-3.0 g/cc. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical gravimetric prover. Eprover cal = The uncertainty from the scale calibration is determined from the measured or accepted deviation between the scale reading and the weights.01% uncertainty. Scale Resolution Batch Size = -----------------------------------------------0. Eprover res = The scale uncertainty due to resolution is determined from the following equation: Scale Resolution E prover res = -----------------------------------------------. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. page 125. The scale should agree with the calibration weights to within ±0. The following calculation can be used to determine the appropriate batch size. Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty Gravimetric provers are a primary standard because. over the range of weight used for calibration.01% ) 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.00025 Ebuoy = The uncertainty due to the buoyancy correction will depend on the accuracy of the densities used to determine the buoyancy correction factor. page 73. the total uncertainty can then be determined as follows: E = ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. Using Equation 8-3. as indicated in Table 8-1.* 100 Batch Size This component is minimized by increasing the size of the test batch.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving From Table 8-2.01% over the entire calibration range. A batch size large enough to result in ±0. and can result in measurement errors of 0.1% and greater.01% ) + ( ± 0.030% The scale resolution is the predominant influence on the calculated uncertainty. This component will generally have less than ±0.025% ) + ( ± 0. This will have a noticeable impact in custody transfer applications. 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. they are calibrated against certified weights. page 71. If truck scales are used.025% or better accuracy should be the target. 74 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . it can be seen that this factor is significant for products of densities less than 1. they may not have sufficient resolution to warrant the additional calculations required to correct for buoyancy. which are a fundamental measurement standard. The uncertainty can be improved by increasing the batch size or improving the scale resolution.

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

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

• The time to complete a batch should be no less than 1 minute. pressure and composition). Repeatability As stated previously. 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 ±0.025%) at a single set of operating conditions (flow rate. sources of the non-repeatability need to Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 77 . No fewer than three test batches should be performed. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved.025%. 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. Flow Sensor On/off valve Avoid Avoid this piping design. the problem generally lies with the prover system. If both meters yield the same type of performance.Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-3. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. For Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. Outlet piping design for filling tank provers. Transmitter applied. which is prone to inconsistent draining.05% (±0. it is likely the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. 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. but may still produce inconsistent batches if head pressure is not sufficient to keep pipe full of process fluid. temperature. be evaluated. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline.

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

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

Proving form B-3. Therefore. Pulse Output Configured for Volume The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-6. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. known as a volumetric field-standard test measure. it may be helpful to refer to Section 9. 8-5) MF m BPV * Ctsp * C psp * ρ p = ---------------------------------------------------------M meter essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. page 178 (Appendix B). The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. however. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations.2 °F and 5 psig is required. 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 . becomes a tertiary standard. these factors are not required. where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . The volumetric field-standard test measure is normally calibrated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Ctlm .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving (Eq.Cplp . For products such as LPG and NGL. and Cplm ) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical volumetric tank prover. Proving form A-3.5. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure. (Eq. against fluid mass and density. there is no specific recommendation available. page 125. a volumetric tank prover. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. which provides a common base for comparison. For products such as crude oil. most volumetric tank provers are calibrated against another reference volumetric tank standard.* --------------------------Q meter C tlm * C plm Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty Volumetric tank provers are a secondary standard if the calibration of the tank volume is determined from the fluid mass and density. page 168 (Appendix A). where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The pressure correction Cpsp is required only for closed tank provers. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation. 8-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp C tlp * C plp MFv = --------------------------------------------. Typically.

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. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.005%. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis.03% ) + ( ± 0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the volumetric tank prover should be within ±0. Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.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. an uncertainty of ±0.073%. Using the values presented above.02%. because the majority of volumetric tank provers are not closed pressure vessels.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-7) using Equation 8-8. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 81 .01% ) + ( ± 0.01%. At best. and (2) Cpsp. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. and should not exceed ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3).3 and 7.4. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.0125% ) + ( ± 0. 8-8) Density Uncertainty (g/cc) E density (%) = ± ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------. (Eq.04% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. An uncertainty of ±0. Only the temperature correction is used in the analysis shown below. page 63.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.8 g/cc. * 100 Process Fluid Density (g/cc) where Esteel = Two steel correction factors may need to be applied: (1) Ctsp. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc can be obtained. (Eq.4 Tank Provers. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover.02% ) + ( ± 0. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to the resolution of the graduations of the site gauge on the prover neck should not exceed ±0.

Using the values presented above. From Equation 8-6.01% ) + ( ± 0. (Eq. bulging. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.03% ) + ( ± 0. as shown in Equation 8-6. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions might be required. However.01% ) + ( ± 0. or the tables could be misapplied. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. For this analysis. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. the errors can be significant. these factors may not even be applied. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.039% Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter.02% ) + ( ± 0. are: • Ensuring the tank volume is not changed by dents. or internal deposits • Site gauge resolution versus tank volume • Batch duration versus ramp-up/ramp-down times • Consistent batch size from one test to the next • Evaporation of process fluid during the test run 82 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-9. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. page 80.01%. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. page 80. All of the terms in Equation 8-9 are the same as those in Equation 8-7.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. If the liquid correction factors are used. which must be considered when performing a volumetric tank proving. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. which introduces a degree of error. page 81. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. 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. 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.

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

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

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. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. thermowell. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow • The following additional instrumentation is required: • Pulse counting device. page 17. Flow Connection valves Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 85 . and Section 3. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. The equations used are the same as those used for volumetric tank provers. page 86. A pressure measurement is also required for correcting for the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for proving with conventional pipe provers: Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor for proving with a conventional pipe prover is determined from Equation 8-10. 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. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. • Conventional pipe prover. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume.1. page 22. the product temperature in the prover must be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. Conventional pipe prover. 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. prior to reading the following details about conventional pipe provers.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Figure 8-6.2. In addition.

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

and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.0001 g/cc can be obtained. or ±0. page 81. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. At best.041% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover ball) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0.03% ) + ( ± 0. (Eq.02% of the volume between the detectors.8 g/cc. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-12) using Equation 88. and (2) Cpsp.3 and 7. An uncertainty of ±0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-12. Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique.4. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.01%.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. 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. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. an uncertainty of ±0.2 Conventional Pipe Provers.000 pulses. Per API MPMS 4. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. and should not exceed ±0.005%.0125% ) + 2* ( ± 0. beginning on page 63.074%. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.01%.01% ) + ( ± 0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.01% ) + ( ± 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 87 .03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). Eprover cal = Eprover res = Ecounter res= Edensity = Esteel = Using the values presented above.02% ) + ( ± 0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.

All of the terms in Equation 8-13 are the same as those in Equation 8-12.01% ) + ( ± 0. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values.01%. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. If the liquid correction factors are used.01% ) + ( ± 0. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. except the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.01% ) + 2* ( ±0.03% ) + ( ± 0. For this analysis. page 86. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. 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.041% 88 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. which introduces a degree of error. From Equation 8-11. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-11. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. the errors can be significant.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 8-13.02% ) + ( ± 0. or the tables could be misapplied. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. page 87. For fairly stable products such as crude oil.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. Using the values presented above. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. these factors may not even be applied. (Eq. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. However. page 86.

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

which requires a prerun duration of at least 0.). 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. Number of Proving Runs No fewer than five proving runs should be performed. where the prover may be relatively small. Proving runs should not begin until the prover temperature has stabilized. the process fluid should be continuously circulated through the prover. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. If both meters yield the same type of performance. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. factors. etc.2 Conventional Pipe Provers for details on sizing the prover volume. To expedite this process. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved.1. its internal volume will change.67 seconds. then determine repeatability between the average meter 90 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . the prover can be coated with suitable materials (such as epoxies. the problem generally lies with the prover. Launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. which is beneficial if the process fluid has poor lubricating properties. to minimize or eliminate these problems. 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. they are a concern with on-the-fly field provers. In some instances. Prover Size Recommendation Sizing a prover is a fairly involved task. It might be necessary to insulate the prover piping to minimize ambient influences. it may be necessary to group individual proving runs and average them. Refer to API MPMS 4.025%). Teflon®. If the meter’s frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate during the prerun period. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover recommended damping factor is 0. An additional benefit of coatings is they can reduce the friction between the ball and the prover. the maximum and minimum allowable velocities and the meter’s K-factor. Repeatability As stated previously. Routine recalibration of the prover will minimize these errors.05% (±0. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Damping Factor Recommendation Although damping considerations are not significant for tank proving methods. the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. If the prover is subjected to harsh process fluids. If the prover experiences erosion or corrosion. This technique is common for small volume provers and is discussed in detail in Section 8. The response time of the meter frequency output depends on the damping factor set in the transmitter. Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover Any variation in the volume of the prover will impact the accuracy of the meter factor. As the prover size is increased there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. resulting in meter factor errors. page 101).4 (see Number of Proving Passes/Runs. which requires knowledge about the operating flow rates.

which generally results in provings taking less time.1 is usually quite conservative. When a proving pass is initiated.8 is preferred. is attached to the piston. However. If poor repeatability is demonstrated. Because a 0. When the flag triggers the first measurement switch. Generally. A diagram of a typical SVP. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different factor. and additional timing computations are required to minimize resolution problems associated with accumulating fewer than 10. the larger damping value is acceptable. the poppet valve is open and fluid flows freely through the piston assembly. If a damping value of 0. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. is presented in Figure 8-7. Therefore. A metal rod. If there is no change in the meter factor between the two different damping value. The volume of an SVP is on the order of 10 to 20 times smaller than a conventional pipe prover used for comparable service.1.8 can be used. them proved again with the damping factor of 0. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. Its small size makes the SVP particularly suitable for portable installations. the poppet valve. The wide flow range allows one SVP to be used for calibrating multiple meters with significantly different flow ratings. special precautions must be taken to ensure the validity of the proving results when using an SVP. the poppet valve is closed pneumatically and seals against the face of the piston.8.8 damping factor. Key components are the prover cylinder and piston. which requires a proving duration of at least 0. The damping factor should not be set any higher than 0.4 Small Volume Prover The terms small volume prover and Compact Prover™ are often used interchangeably. in this case a Brooks Compact Prover. and reduces the time required for the prover displacer to traverse the prover volume.2 seconds. Compact Prover is a trademarked name for the small volume prover manufactured by Brooks Instruments.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 The factory default setting is a 0. which has an optical “flag” mounted on it.67 seconds. However. The flowing fluid pushes the piston downstream through the cylinder.8. a conventional pipe prover is large enough that the prerun will be 4 seconds long.1. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. 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. a simple test can be performed. The primary advantages of a small volume prover (SVP) are its small size and wide flow rate rangeability of 1000:1. page 92. When the prover is in the standby mode or not being operated. sweeping out a volume of fluid. it might be necessary to use a smaller damping factor. except it has a significantly smaller volume. As the piston sweeps through the cylinder volume.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. the “flag” triggers optical measurement switches. 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. pulses from the meter being calibrated are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 91 . creating a solid surface. An SVP is essentially the same as a pipe prover. and eliminates the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. prerun times at the maximum rated flow of the prover can be as short as 0. and the optical detectors. and the prover prerun time is not known. Although the damping factor will have no affect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. because the flow rate indication from the meter varies significantly. 8. many individuals do not like to use a low damping factor. Using the lowest damping factor of 0.000 pulses from the meter.

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

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

The requirements for density averaging will obviously depend on the stability of the process fluid density. A printer is required to produce the report. The product temperature in the prover must also be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover.000 Hz) for timing measurements. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. as shown in Equation 8-16. page 177 (Appendix B). consisting of (1) a pulse counting device. which contains all of the required proving information.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. thermowell. (2) a high-resolution crystal oscillator (>100. and the duration of the individual proving passes. page 17. 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. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. The meter mass is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3.8 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. not the individual proving passes. 8-16) N interpolated M meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. instead of the total meter pulses. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor is determined from Equation 8-15. prior to reading the following details about small volume provers. The equations used are the same as those used for conventional pipe and volumetric tank provers.2. Proving form B-2. In addition. 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. 94 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 22. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. and Section 3. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Proving electronics. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement.

It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. however. 8-18) N interpolated Q meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. page 125.2°F and 5 psig is required. which provides a common base for comparison. For products such as LPG and NGL. (Eq. Cplp . Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. the SVP is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. 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.5. which contains all of the required proving information. 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. page 167 (see Appendix A). Proving form A-2. there is no specific recommendation available. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. The meter volume is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. not the individual proving passes. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 95 . A printer is required to produce the report. There are two differences between this calculation and the one used for conventional pipe provers: 1. as shown in Equation 8-18. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. Therefore. 8-17) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MF v = --------------------------------------------. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. these factors are not required. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. Ctlm . instead of the total meter pulses.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-17. (Eq.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter= Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. For products such as crude oil.

these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.3 and 7.01% ) + ( ± 0. 105-3).0125% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. 96 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .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 8-19.03% (NIST Handbook. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover piston) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. page 81.01% of the volume between the detectors. Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.4 on page 63. However. An uncertainty of ±0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.072%.038% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.8 g/cc.3 Small Volume Provers. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. 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% ) + ( ± 0. 8-19) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( Eprover res ) + ( Ecounter res ) + ( Edensity ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 This calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. At best.005%. and (2) Cpsp. the overall proving uncertainty for a small volume prover is: E = ( ± 0.03% ) + ( ± 0. Esteel Using the values presented above. an uncertainty of ±0.01% 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.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0.01%.01% ) + ( ± 0.0001 g/cc can be obtained. = Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp. (Eq. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-19) using Equation 88.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. and should not exceed ±0.

the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. From Equation 8-17. this calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. page 96. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. 8-20) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E liquid ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 Again. All of the terms in Equation 8-20 are the same as those in Equation 8-19. (Eq. which inherently magnifies the effect of any deviations in the prover performance or meter performance during the proving pass.03% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.01%. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-17.037% Although the uncertainty calculated for a small volume prover is less than for a conventional pipe prover. the errors can be significant. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP. page 95. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. or the tables could be misapplied. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 97 .005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. However. these factors may not even be applied. For this analysis.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. This is due to the smaller prover volume. A density measurement is not needed for this case. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. which will introduces a degree of error. the pass-to-pass proving results obtained from a small volume prover are typically not as repeatable. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.01% ) + ( ± 0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. page 95. If the liquid correction factors are used. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. However.01% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. Using the values presented above the overall proving uncertainty for an SVP is: E = ( ± 0.

The typical optical detector switch is extremely precise. If the number of pulses accumulated during a proving run is less than 1. Therefore. to improve lubricity. 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.025 seconds to obtain ±0. The flag is commonly mounted on a rod made of a steel. the proving repeatability will be 98 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .000. which provides a means for checking whether any flow is bypassing the prover.25 microseconds. Any misalignment between switches will result in measurement errors. and probably require replacement. Because pulse interpolation is used. which has a very low coefficient of thermal expansion. Wear of the seals will be greater with process fluids that have poor lubricating qualities.01% resolution uncertainty. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Precautions Key items that impact the accuracy of the proving. Accumulating Enough Pulses From the uncertainty analysis performed in the previous section. It may be desirable to coat the walls of the proving cylinder with an appropriate epoxy-based compound or baked-on phenolic. the repeatability of the proving will be impacted by the number of pulses accumulated from the meter.000 Hz. so more frequent inspection for leaks is warranted. the switches should be checked to make sure they have not become loose and shifted their position. Even though pulse interpolation is used. The actual proving time is at least 10 times greater than this value. the prime sources of uncertainty are the reference period of the clock and the time period used to accumulate pulses from the meter.01%. If the proving results seem inconsistent with previous results. which must be considered when using a small volume prover. which corresponds to a period of 1. Any leakage past the prover seals will result in measurement errors.000 times greater than the reference period of the clock in order to provide sufficient accuracy. The time period for pulse accumulation must be at least 20. launching the prover piston. to minimize variations in the flag position relative to the detector switches. 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. the piston seals are suspect. the time period required for pulse accumulation is only 0. A waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a detector switch. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. the uncertainty due to the pulse resolution should be less than ±0. the clock frequency is 800. The prover piston seals can be checked for leaks by blocking the prover in. For the Brooks Compact Prover. If the rod that holds the measurement detectors moves more than the amount prescribed by the manufacturer. and applying sufficient actuator pressure. If a detector switch is replaced.

a prerun time of 4 seconds or longer is not very common. page 103. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. A key point to consider is that the Coriolis meter measurement is time based. Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor/Tube Frequency ρ = 0. launching the piston can create significant mechanical shock. which requires a proving prerun of at least 0. 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. To further minimize pulse resolution errors.4. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate. Additional information is presented under Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. The meter takes four internal ∆t samples for each vibration period.8. This in turn causes the voltage signals from the pickoffs to become “noisy”. a lower damping factor will be required. Since small volume provers have such short pass times. However.1. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. (See Section 6. The more internal measurement samples made by the meter. but will make the meter less repeatable. page 53. more passes per run are required.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the piston and accumulating pulses from the meter. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used.8 g/cc 159 139 157 135 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 (Hz) ρ = 0. 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. piston reaches the first detector switch and the accumulation of pulses from the meter begins. and Damping Factor Recommendations. a flow tube that vibrates at 80 Hz will result in 320 internal samples being taken per second. Typical sensor operating frequencies.0012 g/cc ρ = 0. the proving results will be in error. The prerun time must be long enough to ensure that the meter’s frequency output is reflecting the correct flow rate before the Table 8-3. Therefore. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. This is because the number of internal Coriolis meter measurements is limited for short pass times.67 seconds in duration.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 somewhat worse. Prover Plenum Pressure Some small volume provers use pressure to assist in closing the poppet valve to launch the prover piston. page 100.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 99 . when proving times are less than 5 seconds. This generates random vibration which is transmitted to the sensor flow tube and pickoff detectors. Therefore. The internal measurement sampling of the Coriolis meter is based on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. The problem is that launching the prover piston causes the flow rate to change. the transmitter should be configured to produce the maximum number of pulses possible. and additional passes are required to externally accumulate more data from the Coriolis meter. within the frequency constraints of the proving counter. Table 8-3 shows typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. For an SVP. the better the proving repeatability will be. If the plenum pressure is set too high. This does not affect the overall accuracy of the meter measurement. which will transmit down the pipeline to the meter. The shorter the time period for launching the piston. the less repeatable the meter measurement becomes.

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

the maximum recommended flow rate for a Brooks Compact prover is approximately four times less than the prover specification. gal (liters) 5 (20) 10 (40) 15 (60) 30 (120) 65 (250) 100 (400) 170 (650) Maximum flow rate. It is recommended to use the largest size Compact Prover available when proving Coriolis meters.3 Small Volume Provers. Prover Description 8" 12" Midi 12" Std 18" 24" 34" 40" Volume. Table 8-4. The prerun duration at the maximum flow rating of the Compact Prover is on the order of 0. Appendix B. Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters. for determining the maximum flow rate (given the SVP size): (Eq. is most commonly used. Method 3 in Appendix B.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.033 * Proving Flow Rate (units/minute) Note that “units” can be any volumetric unit of measure. but can be a single proving pass. gpm (m³/h) 150 (35) 300 (70) 450 (105) 900 (210) 1940 (450) 3640 (850) 5075 (1150) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 101 . which repeat within 0.05%. 8-22) Prover Volume (units) ≥ 0. due to the smaller quantity of liquid typically measured with an SVP.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Thus. a proving run is generally a group of passes averaged together. page 101. The repeatability specification is used as the determinant in ensuring a sufficient number of proving runs are performed to provide the correct meter factor. Number of Proving Passes/Runs Generally. lists maximum flow rates for Brooks Compact Provers to provide compatibility to MMI Coriolis meters. To clarify terminology used in this discussion: a proving pass is equal to one complete trip of the prover piston. However. there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. Table 8-4. but is also used to provide confidence in the proving results. are used to prove a meter with a conventional prover. flowmeters will generally exhibit unacceptable repeatability when proved with small volume provers using five individual proving trips. Special methods for defining the required number of proving runs for SVPs have been developed and are presented in API MPMS 4. By using a larger prover. five proving round trips. Repeatability is used as an indication of whether the meter and proving system are operating properly. When using Equations 8-21 and 8-22 for sizing small volume provers for use with Coriolis meters.

The number of passes per run should not exceed 20. Increasing the number of passes per run results in improved repeatability (D300/12” Compact Prover 700 lb/min). at 700 lb/min. are performed. At the far left of the graph is the data for one pass per run.05% tolerance.0002 1 0. 1. as described by Method 3. It can be seen that. 5 runs of 20 passes. The same procedure was used for the other sets of data producing: • • • • • 20 runs of 5 passes. 10 runs of 10 passes. Average meter factors for multiple proving runs. 6 runs of 15 passes. The repeatability of meter factors for all of the runs should then fall within the 0. 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. In the next set of data there are three passes in each run. and 4 runs of 25 passes. for this particular example. and then determine an average meter factor for the run. For turbine and PD meters 5 runs of 3 passes each is most commonly used.0008 1. page 124. However. Each data point is the average meter factor for the three 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). Coriolis Meter Number of Passes The question that remains is. is illustrated in Figure 8-9.9992 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 100 Passes per run 102 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .0006 Average meter factor 1.9994 0. At least two runs are needed to calculate repeatability. the number of proving passes required for each proving application will depend on a number of variables: Figure 8-9.9996 0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Method 3 (from API MPMS 4. using 10 passes per run results in a repeatability well within 0. A series of runs. The average of all of the runs then becomes the meter factor to be used for inventory calculation. each consisting of a specified number of passes. using Equation 9-10. how many proving passes are required for each run for Coriolis meters? The technique of grouping proving passes into runs. Appendix B) Method 3 involves accumulating individual prover passes to form a group (run). Usually. These data points represent the individual meter factors for each of the 100 prover passes. Increasing the number of passes in each group decreases the variation between the group meter factors. The 100 prover passes were divided into 33 consecutive runs of three passes each.9998 0.0004 1.05%.3. three or five runs are used. Meter factors are then determined for each run.

and in detail in Section 6.4. Repeatability versus number of passes per run.1 is recommended. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. Results from Figure 8-9. damping concerns are far more important for an SVP than for a conventional pipe prover.016 evaluated.05% (±0.1 reduces the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. 3 to 5 passes per run will usually be acceptable. a damping factor of 0. sources of the non-repeatability need to be Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 103 . If both meters yield the same type of performance.023 0. At flow rates of 50% or less of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. even with 20 passes per prover run.033 0. 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. When using an SVP.052 0. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. • • • • • 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. Due to the small size of an SVP and the subsequent reduction in the proving prerun time.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Table 8-5. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. Using the damping factor of 0.13 0.025%).021 0. page 245. 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). 15 to 20 passes per run may be required. Passes per Run 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 Repeatability (%) 0.064 0. An alternative method for determining the number of passes required for a particular metering application is presented in Appendix I. the problem generally lies with the prover. This method requires an initial group of 30 proving runs of 1 pass each to be conducted. page 53. At flow rates of 75% or greater of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. An equation is then used to calculate the number of passes needed. Repeatability As stated previously.

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

The flow conditioner and turbine meter should be fabricated into an integral meter section. 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. The master meter must be proved in the same fashion as any meter. which will impact the accuracy of the meter.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards 8 A transfer standard proving is illustrated in Figure 8-10. To prevent slippage. The primary concern for positive displacement meters is slippage. fluid viscosity and flow rate. In this example.3.000 Figure 8-10. for an overview of the applicable proving procedures. volumetric flow rate is determined from the fluid velocity. However. Turbine meters are primarily affected by variations in flow profile. a flow conditioner should be used upstream of the turbine in both locations. a transfer standard meter is proved against an SVP to determine a meter factor. A positive displacement meter is a direct volume measurement device. Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter. it is always preferable to prove the Coriolis meter directly against the prover. 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 . the term master meter will be used to describe both transfer standard meters and master meters. Proving Equipment and Procedures The equipment and procedures for master meter proving are essentially the same as for transfer standard proving. 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. except that a conventional or small volume prover must be used with the transfer standard meter. Turbine meters are velocity measurement devices. The volumetric meters that are used as master meters are positive displacement meters and turbine meters. which can be moved from one location to the next. and is then immediately used to prove the Coriolis meter under test. For the rest of this discussion. Refer to Section 3. Minimum pulse requirements. page 30. This technique eliminates the uncertainty associated with proving the meter at one location and moving to a different site.

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

**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

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

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

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

At least 10.9. and impact on uncertainty. The master meter should be repeatable to within ±0.030% could typically be expected. a value of ±0. However. as explained previously. Eprover cal = The uncertainty due to this component will be very subjective. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10.108% The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods.01%.000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter. These meter factors should be documented and applied properly when proving meters in the field with the master meter. A minimum of two runs should be conducted at each flow rate when calibrating the master meter.01%. The value of ±0.10% is used. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. or ±0. Ecounter res= This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the test meter. 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. other than as a transfer standard. The meter’s zero stability must be taken into account. different meter factors may have to be used for different flow rates. a value of ±0. From Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty. page 74.025 ) + ( ± 0. (Eq. Eprover res = This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. and is determined by how closely the master meter agrees with the gravimetric prover when it is calibrated.10% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. (Refer to Section E.025% for all of the proving runs conducted. page 202.030% ) + ( ± 0. For ELITE meters. or ±0.10% is only applicable in the meter’s upper flow range.01% ) + ( ± 0.000 pulses. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the master meter’s mass flow measurement.) The overall proving uncertainty when using a Coriolis master meter would be on the order of: E = ( ± 0. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10.01% ) + ( ± 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 115 .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. for master meter zero consideration. this can be improved by improving the ratio of scale resolution to proving batch size.000 pulses. In order to meet this recommendation. because of the larger meter uncertainty component.

the overall proving uncertainty is: E = ( ± 0. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors.030% ) + ( ± 0. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. All of the terms in Equation 8-30 are the same as those in Equation 8-29. page 114. However. From Equation 8-28.118% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values.118%.0625%.) For ELITE meters. 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. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. The ELITE meter density uncertainty is ±0.01%. If the meters are located close to one another.0005 g/cc.025 ) + ( ± 0. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. page 114. If the liquid correction factors are used. or the tables could be misapplied. For a fluid with a density of 0.1% is used for the mass measurement component. (Eq. Equation 8-8. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant.01% ) + ( ± 0. 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. Using the values presented above. which introduces a degree of error. this equates to an uncertainty of ±0. as shown in meter factor Equation 8-28. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the Coriolis master meter’s mass flow measurement and density measurement. is used. since both of these measurements are used to provide the volume measurement. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. a value of ±0. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required. 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. (Refer to Section E. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. these factors may not even be applied.01% ) + ( ± 0. For the density uncertainty. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values.8 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. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.9. page 81. the errors can be significant. page 115. page 202. for master meter zero considerations and impact on uncertainty.126% 116 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . For fairly stable products such as crude oil. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the Coriolis master meter and the Coriolis test meter.8 g/cc.

Collecting 10.000 pulses from a Coriolis meter may not be sufficient to ensure that the proving results are repeatable. page 49. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. the process temperature and pressure at the master meter should be monitored. the proving should never be less than one minute in duration. it is usually quite easy to collect Number of Proving Runs No fewer than three proving runs should be performed. The proving duration should be no shorter than one minute when performing master meter proving. and the proving duration must be long enough to allow a sufficient number of pulses to be accumulated. If there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. Proving Duration for Repeatable Output The proving duration must be long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter. as discussed in Section 6. This may not be possible. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. Any inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved. A proving run time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. page 205. a minimum of 10. When using a master meter.3. 10. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. 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.000 pulses. the test meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. provides a discussion on influences on the Coriolis meter’s mass measurements. For enough pulses to be accumulated. page 223.000 Hz output. An advantage of master meter proving is the fact that the proving time can be set to any desired value. depending on the facilities available to prove the Coriolis master meter. and Appendix H. Appendix F. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. because of the larger meter uncertainty component.01%. Because the frequency output can be scaled to a maximum 10. even on proving runs of very short duration. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. 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. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 117 . discusses volume. and appropriate compensations for variations in process conditions be used. Recommended Proving Duration A proving time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. To minimize errors in pulse accumulation. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods.000 pulses must be accumulated from both the master meter and the test meter during the proving run. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. other than as a transfer standard.000 pulses. If the master meter cannot be proved under normal operating conditions. it is important that the master meter performance be well characterized. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. In order to track the impact of process conditions on the performance of the master meter. which must be considered when using a Coriolis master meter. Appendix G. Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. discusses density.

8 (the factory-set default value). If this repeatability specification cannot be met. 118 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. 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. which would cause changes in the fluid flow rate. Problems can often be identified by using redundant metering in the pipeline.025%). If both test meters yield the same type of performance.8 are not recommended. Damping Factor Recommendation Because no prover displacer is launched. damping considerations are not typically of concern when performing master meter proving. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Repeatability The typical repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. Therefore. the problem generally lies with the master meter. 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. the recommended damping factor is 0.05% (±0. Damping factors larger than 0. If one of the test meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. which provides a stable output signal. In addition.

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

120 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The total number of pulses accumulated is divided by the meter’s volume K-factor to determine the volume of fluid measured by the Coriolis meter. 9. 9-3) Coriolis Meter Pulses Q meter = ----------------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6. if the process conditions are not the same at the meter and the prover. Ctlm.* -------------------------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 Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors are not used for volumetric master meters. 9-2) BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp C tlp * C plp MF v = -----------------------------------------. Cplp. conventional prover. The calculations used depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. Because the volume of these proving devices varies with changes in process temperature and pressure. page 49. correction factors (Ctsp and Cpsp) must be applied to obtain the true volume of the prover. small volume prover (SVP). When performing provings against a tank prover. For definitions of the terms and symbols used in the following sections. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter volume instead of the number of pulses accumulated. (Eq. Equation 9-2 is the standard proving equation used for all volumetric flowmeters. or volumetric master meter.1 Volume Meter Factor The basic volume meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-1. In addition. as shown in Equation 9-3.9 Proving Calculations Summary When determining the meter factor for a Coriolis meter. The Coriolis meter volume measurement (Qmeter) in Equation 9-1 is typically determined from a frequency totalizing device. (Eq. and Cplm) are needed to correct the volume of the liquid at the two locations to the same reference conditions. a batch totalizing device can be used. corrections factors (Ctlp. refer to Terminology and Mathematical Variables on page xxi. This value can then be entered directly into Equations Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 121 . Proving calculations for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. 9-1) Prover Volume MFv = -----------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Volume (Eq. the objective is to compare the quantity of product measured by the prover to the quantity of product measured by the meter.3.

For volumetric proving devices. 9-4) Prover Mass MF m = ----------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Mass corrected to the conditions at the prover. 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. 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. Accurate determination of the density is critical. page 25. If the fluid temperature and pressure remain constant between the prover and the density measurement device. and Cplp = Cplm. as shown in Equation 9-6. For additional information. (Eq. The temperature and pressure measurements should be taken as close to the density measurement device as is practical. page 139. it will be necessary to prove the meter’s density measurement. Chapter 11. (Eq.9 Proving Calculations Summary Volume Meter Factor 9. page 64. A density factor (DF) is obtained. (Eq. These terms will then cancel out. 9-6) C tlm * C plm ρ p = ρ m * -------------------------C tlp * C plp For gravimetric tank and Coriolis master meter proving. 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. the fluid density at the prover must be determined. It can be installed either at the prover inlet or outlet. or measuring temperature and pressure to convert to a standard volume. 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. then the density measurement must be 122 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . and Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement. however. This eliminates the need for making a density measurement to convert volume to mass.1. The density at the prover (ρp) is equal to the meter’s density reading times the density factor. 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. then: Ctlp = Ctlm. the prover mass is easily determined. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. The subscript m in Equation 9-6 stands for the meter location. and the density at the prover can be considered to be the same as the density at the meter. however. If the density is not determined right at the prover. The density measurement device should be located as close to the prover as is practical. Density Measurement Device. which in turn will result in incorrect product accounting. it is preferable to locate it between the meter and the prover. refer to Using a Density Meter at the Prover. Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving. Equation 9-5 is used for proving the Coriolis meter mass reading against a volumetric prover.2 Mass Meter Factor The basic mass meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-4. and Section 11. page 27.

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. at least five proving runs are performed. For small volume provers 3 or 5 runs of 10 passes each is recommended. 9. The repeatability is used as an indication of whether the proving results are valid.05%. a batch totalizing device can be used. When performing provings against tank provers. 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. This value can then be entered directly into Equations 9-4 and 9-5. refer to Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units. Typically. 9-7) C oriolis Meter Pulse M meter = -----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6. A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter mass instead of the number of pulses accumulated.05% often indicates these meters require maintenance.3. page 29. the prover. or some other component in the proving system. which provides proper accounting of the inventory being measured. This value is based on experience with turbine and PD meters proved with conventional pipe provers.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.4 Repeatability The objective of proving a flowmeter is to obtain a meter factor. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. The general criterion used when proving flowmeters is that the repeatability of the proving results be within 0. to provide some level of confidence in the proving results. 9-8) MFm= MFv * DF where MFm= mass meter factor MFv = volume meter factor DF = density factor For additional details about this proving approach. A repeatability value that exceeds 0. page 49. The number of proving runs required for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. (Eq. An alternative is to prove the Coriolis meter’s volume and density measurements and calculate the mass meter factors from the following equation: (Eq. 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). 9. Meter Configured for Volume The API recommended equation for calculating repeatability is: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 123 .

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

“Measurement of fluid flow—Estimation of uncertainty of a flow-rate measurement. and determining the sensitivity of the measurement to the individual error sources. the proving system.0002 g/cc will consume a significant portion of the 0. If density cannot be maintained within 0. A density variation of 0.05% repeatability specification.Proving Calculations Summary Meter Factor Uncertainty 9 changing temperature and pressure.” This method of determining uncertainty involves identifying all of the sources of error. For each error source.1%. This may require increasing the size of a tank prover. a Coriolis meter that is functioning properly and is within the manufacturer’s specification would be considered to be unacceptable based on the 0.* 100 2*(FlowRate) The base repeatability is ±0. 9-11) Zero Stability Repeatability (%) = 0. and the fluid properties should all be checked to verify the entire system is stable and functioning properly. as shown in Equation 9-12. then the Coriolis meter. the uncertainty is multiplied by a calculated sensitivity coefficient.05%. (Eq. the repeatability limits may need to be increased. A Coriolis meter is functioning properly if it is operating within its normal repeatability specification. Other difficult applications involve products with changing composition. Alternatively.05% may be an indication of whether a turbine or PD meter is functioning properly.0002 g/cc. The total uncertainty is based on the contributions of the following components: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 125 .05 + -----------------------------------. Therefore. Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters Although a repeatability of 0. For example. 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. The total uncertainty is determined by performing a square root of the sum of the squares calculation on all of the error components. If density cannot be maintained during the proving. such as crude oil/water mixtures. it is recommended that a density sampling method be implemented to provide an average density for each proving run. the repeatability specification for ELITE sensors is presented in Equation 9-11.05% repeatability specification. Additional proving runs are recommended to improve confidence in the data. but it may require using proving runs with a greater quantity of fluid than would be used for a turbine meter. This is twice the common proving guideline of 0.05% repeatability specification can generally be achieved with a Coriolis meter. which is a total range of 0. it does not necessarily indicate the same for a Coriolis meter. If the repeatability of a proving is greater than the usual repeatability. There will always be some degree of uncertainty associated with the proving results.05%. 9.5 Meter Factor Uncertainty The meter factor calculated as a result of the proving can only be as accurate as the proving devices. The 0. pipe prover or small volume prover. A common method used to determine uncertainty is presented in ISO standard 5168.

9.25% — that is. if used • Any uncertainty in the density determination. and will vary somewhat from one proving system to the next. The reproducibility will ultimately be established from experience with each individual proving system. and fluid properties will also have a significant impact. Understanding the uncertainty associated with the proving method is important for determining the applicability of the meter factor. then the meter factor should not be changed. 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. proving method. the meter factor from the current proving should be within ±0. The reproducibility requirements will be governed by Weights and Measures requirements or contract requirements. 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. This concept is explained in more detail in Section 9. The value that is determined is dependent on the characteristics of the individual proving system. in service where the process fluid conditions remain relatively constant.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. For many pipeline applications. if needed • Any uncertainty associated with additional correction factors used for determining the meter factor (Eq.6 Reproducibility and Trend Charting Reproducibility is the ability of a meter/prover system to reproduce results over a long period of time. 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. If the variation in meter factors from one proving to the next is within the overall uncertainty of the meter factor determination.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.6. 126 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are ±0. The proving equipment. The proving reproducibility does not depend solely upon the performance of the meter. Uncertainties for each proving method are presented in Section 8.

999 0.0013 Uncertainty of proving method ±0. The trend chart should be developed with the meter factor of the first proving as the centerline.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving.003 Meter factor (MF) Acceptable meter factor range ±0.996 0.25% — that is. includes a trend chart for tracking the Coriolis meter’s meter factors over multiple provings.Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting 9 A change in the meter factor greater than the user-defined limits should be considered suspect. Trend charting of meter factors will be valuable in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter and determining the required frequency of proving. A New Meter Factor Is Determined. indicate that it might be necessary to perform provings more often. the limits can be set around the average meter factor from a sequence of periodic provings.002 1. Whenever the meter factor is changed. new uncertainty limits would need to be recalculated to determine when it would be necessary to change the meter factor again. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are 0. Appendix D.0009 MF = 1. the uncertainty of the proving method should also be included on the trend chart (represented in Figure 9-1 as dashed lines).995 1-Jun MF = 1. which are plotted in Figure 9-1.004 1. page 128. contains hypothetical meter factors for 11 provings.001 MF = 1. Alternatively. 1. held once per month. And New Limits Are Established. which is defined to be ±0. If the meter factor varies from one proving to the next. as discussed in the previous section.005 1.001 1 0.998 0. In addition to the acceptance limits. Variations in the meter factor from proving to proving.997 0. as illustrated in Figure 9-1. 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. The proving uncertainty should be used as the criterion for determining when to change the value being used for the meter factor. When A New Meter Factor Falls Outside The Established Meter Factor Uncertainty Limits. which exceed the user-defined limits.25% and –0. and every effort should be made to assure that the Coriolis meter and proving system are functioning properly. Uncertainties for each proving method are detailed in Section 8. Meter Factor Trend Chart. Table 9-1.0005 MF = 1. The only time a new meter factor should be applied is when the value of the meter factor exceeds the uncertainty limits of the proving. the meter factor from the current proving should be within 0. page 189.25% of the centerline. Acceptable Meter Factor Range Is Determined From First Meter Factor. it is not necessarily appropriate to apply a new meter factor to the Coriolis meter’s reading.035%. and acceptance limits at +0. For many pipeline applications.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 . Figure 9-1.25% 1.

00135 — — 1. RFT9739 with Software Version 3. many users prefer to determine a new meter factor every time the meter is proved.0015 1. 128 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The values in these registers correct the meter’s measurements as shown in Equation 9-14.0 or Higher Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. or use an external device to correct the meter’s measurement. Trend Chart Data.001 Leave MF=1.001 1.0005 Change MF=1.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations Table 9-1. Data Are Charted In The Graph Shown In Figure 9-1.00125 — 1. without having to modify the factory calibration factors. These registers allow the results of a proving to be input directly into the transmitter’s memory.0012 1. and often results in the meter factor being changed unnecessarily.00095 to 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.7 Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations In general.0005 Leave MF=1.0014 Action Use MF=1.0013 1. and density factor (DF).0005 1.001 Change MF=1.0013 Leave MF=1. which eliminates the need for determining the uncertainty of the proving method and developing uncertainty limits.00065 to 1. (Eq.0007 1. However.00015 to 1.0013 New uncertainty limits (Uncertainty = ±0.0011 1. the meter’s inventory will be determined from Equation 9-13.00085 — — 1. The meter factor value used in this equation is the average meter factor from a number of proving runs.0009 Leave MF=1.0005 Leave MF=1.0006 1. (Eq.00165 — — Although this method is technically correct.0013 Leave MF=1.00055 to 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 1.035%) Determined to be 1. 9-14) Corrected Measurement = MF * Uncorrected Measurement Three factors are available: mass meter factor (MFm).0009 Change MF=1.0007 1. it does not provide an indication of the reliability of the proving technique. The meter factor that is determined during proving is entered into the appropriate register.0 and higher. 9.001 Leave MF=1.0009 1. volume meter factor (MFv).

Then the new meter factor determined during proving would be entered into the meter factor register. and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3. and the proving results would not be applied to correct the meter inventory. if the meter’s mass flow rate is proved. The scalable frequency output of the Coriolis meter can lead to confusion. if a meter factor is being used.Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations 9 Because volume is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. The calibration factor resides in the transmitter. the MFv will automatically be reset to a value of 1. the mass meter factor (MFm) that is determined will correct the meter’s volume measurement. The flow calibration factor is a coefficient. Equation 9-15 should be used. the meter factor can be set to 1. 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. where MFcurrent=Meter factor currently being used MFproving=Meter factor determined from proving RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3.0000 would have been applied. the meter’s pulse output will be modified. The problem is. the meter measurement can be corrected internally by determining a new flow calibration factor. If these two values were the same they would cancel out. However. The meter measurement can be corrected by externally applying a meter factor in a flow computer or DCS.) This can lead to considerable confusion and should be avoided.0.0000. and is set to 1. However. 9-15) MFnew = MF current * MFproving external meter factor. the mass and density measurements will not be corrected. Alternatively. using the approach of determining a new K-factor as shown in Equation 9-16 is not recommended for Coriolis meters. 9-16) K–Factor old K–Factor new = -------------------------------MF proving Because the meter factor is already incorporated into the new K-factor. Values in the meter factor registers adjust all of the meter’s measurements and outputs — digital. Likewise. In order to determine the new meter factor. it is recommended that a new meter flow calibration factor be determined using Equation 9-17.0000 during proving. Entering a volume meter factor (MFv) will cause the MFm and DF registers to be reset to a value of 1. is not needed. as shown in Equation 9-16. the meter factor determined will actually be a composite of the meter factor from the proving and the current meter factor. only the pulse output is affected by this approach. the analog and digital values will not be affected. if the meter’s volume is proved. The disadvantage to this approach is that the inventory measurement during proving will not be corrected by the old meter factor. If the meter is then proved. if a density factor (DF) is entered. This was done to prevent the accidental application of multiple factors to the meter’s volume measurement. the volume meter factor (MFv) is only applied to the meter’s volume measurement.0 Model RFT9712 transmitters. a meter factor of 1. For turbine and PD meters this is accomplished by determining a new K-factor for the meter. (Eq. If a MFm or DF is entered. which should be entered in the meter factor register. which is used to convert the time difference between the sensor pickoff signals to a mass flow rate. Additionally. Alternatively. the meter factor in Equation 9-13.0000. or manually.000. it will also correct the meter’s volume measurement. Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended For batching applications — such as tank or truck filling. pulse and analog. (Eq. (Essentially. Therefore. For applications in which applying an external meter factor is not desired. 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 . have no meter factor registers.

security restrictions on the meter would need to be broken to accomplish this. If this method is adopted.6. If there are Weights and Measures certifications associated with the meter. as described in Section 9. 130 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 126). 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.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations (Eq. it is important that a trend chart be developed for varying flow calibration factors (instead of meter factors.

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

132 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

in a safe area. • If the Coriolis meter’s density output will be used in the proving computations. Vibration influences between two Coriolis sensors is known as crosstalk. in a safe area. a density averaging device. • Because of the short prerun time when using a small volume prover (SVP). output signals and other transmitter information. to allow access to HART communication without opening the transmitter housing. a damping factor of 0. Improper density determination is the major source of problems when proving Coriolis meters with volumetric provers. vibration isolation may be required when sensors of the same size and model are mounted close to one another. Additionally. • When a volumetric proving device is used to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. a volumetric master meter may be needed as a transfer standard. default damping factor of 0.8. one of the transmitter’s analog outputs should be configured for density indication. proper density determination at the prover is required. Proving Recommendations • Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving Coriolis meters. which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run. A damping factor of 0. but may be impractical for field applications. density reading. ELITE sensors have been designed to minimize crosstalk influences. • If the prover is too small to obtain adequate repeatability. ethylene. to allow access to the proving signal without opening the transmitter housing. • 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. liquid CO2). page 189. • Multiple pulse counting devices can be connected to the transmitter’s frequency outputs as long as the resulting load is not excessive. ten or more passes per proving run will provide the best results. • A Coriolis master meter is generally best suited to meter verification for ISO 9000 requirements. in which structural damage to other piping components has occurred. • A set of wires (a “pigtail”) from the transmitter’s frequency output should be routed to a an appropriate connector or conduit junction box. • The transmitter’s frequency output should be scaled to provide the maximum number of pulses possible to reduce uncertainty due to pulse resolution. is recommended.) 134 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The damping factor should not be modified after the meter has been proved.8 should be suitable for most proving applications.1 is recommended. The damping value should never exceed 0. flow rate reading.1 is recommended. • Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. • The factory-set. proving a Coriolis meter with an SVP is challenging. For small volume provers. This will allow access to information on the meter configuration. (See Appendix D. Transmitter Outputs and Configuration • It is recommended that the transmitter’s frequency output be used for both inventory measurement and proving. • For products that exhibit significant density variations (such as LPG. because prerun times can be quite short.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations vibrate severely. Generally.

Prover 3. Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. • 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. The flow rate should never vary by more than ±10% while proving. Recording the meter’s configuration factors every time the meter is proved is a useful tool to aid in troubleshooting meter performance. For small volume provers. or any flowmeter.0000. Entrained gas affects both the prover repeatability and the meter repeatability. Prover • For conventional pipe provers.8. Meter configuration should always be checked to make sure it has not changed from one proving to the next. greater is desired. • 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. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. • Check all block and bleed valves to ensure proper sealing is being accomplished. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. Refer to page 218 for information on vibration effects. Maintain sufficient pressure at the prover to keep the fluid from flashing. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. Coriolis meter 4. make sure the plenum pressure has been properly set.2 Proving Troubleshooting When proving Coriolis meters. • If the meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved with a volumetric prover. The Prolink software can be used to save this data to an ASCII file on a computer. and the activation is repeatable. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate is stable during proving. to ensure proper tempering of the system. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. the minimum allowable prerun time is 0. • Make sure the prover detector switches are functioning properly.67 seconds. make sure the volume of the hose does not change while the meter is being proved. • If flexible hose is used for the prover connections. Check for switch bounce. • A few passes of the ball or displacer should be made before initiating the proving. • Make sure the prover is appropriately sized. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. A prover prerun of 1 second or Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 135 .Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 10. which may randomly trigger the counter. Check the ball for erosion and scoring. make sure the prover ball is properly filled to provide a good seal. Piping • Check for piping leaks. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. A density averager will be required if the density variation exceeds this value.0002 g/cc. • For small volume provers that use pressure to launch the piston. Watch for oscillating control valves. the density should vary by no more than 0. Piping 2. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate for the prover size. but does not drag. Ensure the ball is compatible with the process fluid.1. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. • Crosstalk (vibration influences between Coriolis sensors) may be an issue if multiple Coriolis sensors are installed in the same pipeline.

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

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

138 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

140 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The resulting density factor (DF) is determined as shown in Equation 11-2. The information in this section explains how to obtain and prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. Some users might have concerns about using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove the meter’s mass flow measurement. the density of the meter is compared to the density determined from a reference device. The density calibration constants Ca and Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement—Continuous Density Measurement. page 223. the density factor (DF) is applied as shown in Equation 11-3. (Eq. and influences on this measurement. the Coriolis meter can be used in any service where a density measurement is needed. One alternative to installing a density meter at the prover is to use the density measurement from the Coriolis meter. it should be kept in mind that a Coriolis meter’s density and mass flow measurements are entirely independent of one another. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. The density measurement from a Coriolis meter could be thought of as being obtained from a separate measuring device. 11-3) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MFm = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 141 . Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the mass flow meter factor that is determined. – C b f Because the Coriolis meter is a vibrating tube density meter. When proving the Coriolis meter’s mass flow measurement.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Coriolis meters measure density in the same way that other vibrating tube density meters do. it is important to prove the density measurement against an established reference. Another option is to install an additional Coriolis meter at the prover to provide a density measurement. To prove the Coriolis meter’s density. A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. 11-2) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------ρ where ρ = Coriolis meter density measurement Refer to Appendix G. as shown in Equation 11-1. Therefore. 11-1) 1 2 ρ = C a -. a density measurement must be made at the prover to convert the prover volume to mass.6. However. 11. 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. This API standard contains a wealth of information on the installation and field verification of density measurement devices. it falls under the requirements of API MPMS 14.1 Overview Meter proving is typically performed with volumetric provers. (Eq. for a detailed discussion on the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. (Eq.

the density meter will be mounted in a slipstream. The RFT9739 transmitter provides better density measurement accuracy than the Model RFT9712. it can be applied as shown in Equation 11-6.0005 g/cc over a range of 0. can be used to perform this calculation if necessary. the same as most other density meters. (Eq. If the D600 sensor is used on an application in which the pressure varies by more than ±50 psi. (Eq. If the prover and Coriolis meter are located close enough to one another. The advantage of this method is that it employs the standard proving practices and calculations described in API standards.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.0002 g/cc at any single density. and the need for sampling systems is eliminated. page 187 (Appendix C). The D600 density measurement is affected by pressure. Equation 11-4 can be used to correct the density measured by the Coriolis meter to prover conditions. 1-inch being the most common. the meter should be pressure compensated using an in-line pressure transmitter. Some type of sampling system is then required to divert a representative fluid sample into the density meter. 11-4) C tlp * Cplp ρ p = ρ m * ------------------------------C tlm * Cplm the Coriolis meter’s volume measurement using standard proving procedures. with a repeatability of ±0. The mass meter factor can then be calculated as shown in Equation 11-5. There are always concerns with sampling system accuracy and being assured that the fluid sample truly represents what is flowing in the pipeline. Subsequently. 11-6) ρ actual = DF * ρ measured An alternative method of determining the mass meter factor is to prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. and then prove 11. which impacts measurement accuracy at pressures greater than 1000 psig. Refer to page 229 in Appendix G. it can be assumed that the density at the prover is equal to the density at the Coriolis meter.1 to 3. the Coriolis meter must measure the entire process fluid stream. for details on pressure compensation. The CMF300 sensor has a very slight pressure effect on density. The preferred Micro Motion meters for density measurement are the ELITE sensors and the Model D600 sensor.0 g/cc. However. To obtain a flow rate measurement. (Eq. one of the key advantages of Coriolis meters is that they are available in a variety of sizes. The smaller sized Coriolis meters can be used in a sampling system to provide a density measurement. with the Model RFT9739 transmitter. ρp. If this is not the case. The density accuracy for the RFT9739 with an ELITE sensor or D600 sensor is ±0. 142 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 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.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement Equation 11-3 uses the density at the prover. If a 1-inch density meter is being used on a 4-inch pipeline. 11-5) MFm = MFv * DF If the density factor will be used to correct the meter’s density measurement. the density measurement also represents the entire fluid stream. Pressure compensation of the CMF200 sensor is also recommended for applications in which the pressure varies by more than ±200 psig. Proving form C-2.

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

Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Analog Density The transmitter analog output is typically used for process control. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0.5 seconds. 15 meters for 0.8V peak-to peak. the response time of the digital density made available to digital outputs. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. • Under Modbus protocol. If polling addresses are used. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. • Under HART protocol. The value of the “internal damping” can be varied from 0 to 8192 seconds. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. Depending on the selected protocol. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. Therefore. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible. requirements vary as follows. The RFT9739 implements a selective digital software filter on the density output. the basic density measurement is updated by the microprocessor every 0.1 mm2 wire). independent of the frequency of vibration of the meter. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the density. The baud rate is limited to 1200 baud. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire. Consult 144 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. the “internal damping” value for density should not exceed 0.3 mm2 wire. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level.2 kHz. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22 (485A). designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. with an amplitude of 0. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. depends on any additional “internal damping” that is applied. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. A limitation of analog outputs is that they must be properly scaled and trimmed to provide an accurate measurement. Digital Density Response Time Using an RFT9739. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks — Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). RS-485 Multidrop Networks — Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. such as the RS-485. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. Bell 202.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. For proving applications. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. However. the primary variable (PV) analog output can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. or a display.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 27 (485A). The damping value is a filter coefficient.1 seconds.2 or 2. Therefore.

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

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

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

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

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

13. and V3 should all be closed. Pp. there will be small changes in the last digits of the density reading. e. Personnel must have a complete understanding of the fluid properties and associated hazards. c. If a flow indication (FIp) is being used. an additional vent valve and line can be installed between valves V1 and Vin.) 11.02%. Coriolis meter temperature. then close Vin. Verify that pressure and temperature measurement devices are operating suitably.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density Proving Procedure Again. If they do not. (Alternately. b. open the return valve V3. 12.Break the pipe fitting between Vout and V3. Empty the pycnometer of its contents in a safe location. 154 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Record the weight (Wf). Tp. to ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer valves. Adjust the throttle valve V4 to divert fluid into the sampling loop. repeat steps 4 through 13 until two consecutive runs agree to within 0. The measured evacuated weight must agree with the pycnometer’s certificate weight to within ±0. Repeat steps 4 through 11 for a second run. Tm. d. 1.5 damping value. 10. ensure sufficient flow is being diverted into the sampling loop. safety should be the top priority for the operating personnel of the density proving system. Remove the pycnometer from the sample loop and check for leakage. The inlet and outlet valves to the pycnometer Vin and Vout should be open. (With a 0.Check for agreement of pressure (to 1 psig) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. Calculate the density factor (DF) for the two runs (as shown in the following section).) d. b. Verify the scale calibration against certified test weights. 6. Allow the system to achieve steady state conditions: a. c. d. Record density data: a. The density factors for the two runs are averaged to obtain the final density factor for the Coriolis meter (DFavg). Install the pycnometer in the density sampling loop as shown in either Figure 11-2. Open sampling loop inlet valve V1.Pycnometer temperature. 3.) 8.2°F) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer.When the pycnometer and sampling loop are full of fluid. The density factor for the two runs must agree to within 0. 10 to 15 seconds apart. e. 14. Fill the pycnometer using the following valve opening sequence: a. b. 5. e. c. Verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight (see page 155 for the procedure). page 149. Pm. 4. Coriolis meter density reading. Weigh the pycnometer immediately. Valves V1. c. It may necessary to record two or three readings and average them. ρ. V2. Perform the following operations to disconnect and remove the pycnometer: a. Coriolis meter pressure. 7. b. The density proving procedure is detailed below. (It is suggested that three or four readings be made. 9.Open sampling loop vent valve V2. Immediately close the pycnometer valves. the density update is fairly rapid. Close the vent valve V2.Pycnometer pressure.05%. First close Vout. Close V2. 2.05%. personnel should be informed of escape routes and the location of the nearest fire extinguishers. a small amount of gas will be released. Check for agreement of temperature (to 0. page 150. There should be plans for worst case events. Break the pipe fitting between V1 and Vin. or Figure 11-3. Any leakage from the pycnometer will void the test and require steps 4 through 9 to be repeated. Close density sampling inlet and outlet valves V1 and V3.Open vent valve V2 to discharge any vapor from the sampling line.

**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

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

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

162 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

164 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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. gallons and g/cc. and Form A-5 shows the calculation for proving the Coriolis meter volume against a master Coriolis meter measuring mass. These option were not covered in the primary text because they are not typical proving scenarios. The forms use the units of lbs. When using weigh scales. for use in developing forms with other units of measure. Buoyancy factors are presented in Table A-2. 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.

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

Small Volume Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flowe Rate Density Passes per Run gal pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. 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 . gal/min Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-2. Meter Serial 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. 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 . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. Meter Serial No. gal/min 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 Temperature at Master (°F) Ctlp Pressure at Master (psig) Cplp Temperature at Meter (°F) Ctlm Pressure at Meter (psig) Cplm Master Volume (gal) = (Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor) * Ctlp * Cplp * MFmaster Meter Volume (gal) = (Meter Pulses / Meter K-Factor) * Ctlm * Cplm Meter Factor = Master Volume / Meter Volume MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 169 .Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-4. Meter Serial No. gal/min Meter Tag No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs. 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.

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. 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.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-5. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.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 . gal/min Meter Tag No.

Meter Serial No.3454 Meter Factor = Corr. Gravimetric Tank Prover Company Target Test Quantity Weigh Scale Resolution Meter K-Factor Flow Rate lb lb pulse/gal Date Meter Model No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-6. Meter Tag No. page 172 1 2 3 4 5 Corrected Scale Mass (lb) = Scale Total * Buoyancy Factor Meter Volume (gal) = Pulses / K-Factor or = Totalizer Display Value Meter Mass (lb) = Meter Volume * Density * 8.Scale Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 171 . 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.

0019 1.999098 k/m³=SG * 999.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.0014 1.1 1.0 0. Density.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.0011 1. kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density.0005 1.001 * kg/m³ *If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity).8 0.0007 1.098 Table A-2.0023 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .7 0. Buoyancy correction 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 = 8.0005 1.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101.0008 1.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0.5 Correction Factor 1.0006 1. g/cc 2.9 1.0012 1.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement .3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.6 1.0 1.6 0.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.2 1.4 1.0009 1.8 1.0007 1.0009 1. Table A-1.0005 1.5 1.0016 1.9 0. the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above.0007 1.7 1.3 1.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62. Proving conversion factors. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.

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

174 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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. Coriolis Meter Mass vs.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-2.3454 Avg Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor Avg Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 177 . Meter Tag No. Current Meter Factor (MFcurrent ) Average Meter Zero Reading (optional) Run Number: Avg Meter Interpolated Pulses Avg Density at Prover (g/cc) (Form C-2 may be required) 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Temperature at Prover (°F) Avg Ctsp Avg Pressure at Prover (psig) Avg Cpsp Avg Prover Volume (gal) = BPV * Ctsp * Cpsp Avg Prover Mass (lb) = Prover Volume * Density * DF * 8. Meter Serial No.

Meter Tag No. 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.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 Serial No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. 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.

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 * 8.3454 * 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 . Meter Serial No. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Volumetric Master Meter Company Master Meter K-Factor Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) Date pulse/gal pulse/lb lb/min Meter Model No. Meter Tag No.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-4.

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

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

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

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

Run Number:

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

%

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

= MFcurrent * MFproving

180

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

B

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

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

Run Number:

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

see Table B-2, page 182

1

2

3

4

5

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

%

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

= MFcurrent * MFproving

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

181

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

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

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

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

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

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

182

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Appendix

C

Proving Forms for Density Measurement

Form C-1 Form C-2

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

186 187 187

Table C-1

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

183

184

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

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

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

Meter Serial No. Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions Company Meter Model No. Density conversion factors.Proving Forms for Density Measurement C Form C-2.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc g/cc = .999098 * SG(15°C) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 187 .99012 * SG(60°F) g/cc = .51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62. 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-1.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350. Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8. Meter Tag No.

188 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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.

0075 1. Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.0025 1.0000 0. Calibration Factor K–Factor Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Meter Factor Repeatability 0.0050 1.00% 192 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .9975 0.10% 0.05% 0.9925 Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.D Proving Charts Form D-1.15% 0. Meter Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.9950 0.

15% 0. Density Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.0010 1.00% Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 193 .9990 0. Prover Base Volume Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial Number Density Calibration Factor 1.10% 0.0000 0.0030 1.9980 0.0020 1.9970 Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Density Factor Repeatability 0.Proving Charts D Form D-2.05% 0.

194 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . . . .Appendix E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed E. . . . .9 Form E-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 195 . . . . . . . Example 1—Meter proving required when meter is rezeroed . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 E. . . . . . . . .2 E. Meter Zero Procedure . Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters . .6 E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Zero Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Viewing the Zero Reading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 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 the Error Caused by a Zero Offset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 E. . . . . . .8 E. . . . . . . Determining if the Meter Needs to be Rezeroed. .7 Overview . . . . Is Proving Required When the Meter is Rezeroed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trending Zero Variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

196 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

the baseline offset between the pickoffs (∆t) under no-flow conditions is determined. Rezeroing of the meter should not be performed unless it is necessary. 5.) The meter can be zeroed in any of four ways: • Using the zero button on the transmitter electronics module (field-mount RFT9739 only). The sensor must be properly mounted in the pipeline. 2. • Using the scroll and reset functions. (Eq. 4. the following conditions must be met: 1. it is recommended that no fewer than 2048 cycles be selected. or another HART-compatible or Modbus-compatible master controller. The purpose of this appendix is to help to evaluate the need for meter rezeroing. or if there are flow pulsations that would cause movement of fluid in the sensor. as indicated by Equation E-1.1 Overview As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter. in Appendix F. which would cause all subsequent measurements to be in error. This process is called zeroing the meter.2 Meter Zero Procedure For the ∆tzero value to be valid. This is the default zeroing time. For example. When the meter is properly zeroed. E-1) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆tzero ) When the meter is initially installed it must be zeroed. The sensor cable must be wired to the transmitter prior to applying power to the transmitter. A valve downstream from the sensor must be closed to ensure there is no flow through the sensor during the zeroing procedure. 3. The result of zeroing is that a ∆tzero value will be determined and be stored in a zero register. the ProLink program. (It may be necessary to block the sensor in by closing an additional upstream valve if the fluid is extremely thermally expansive. The remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. The transmitter must have been connected to power and warmed up for at least 30 minutes. based on the sensor flow tube frequency. • Using an external switch if one has been wired to the transmitter. The zeroing operation takes approximately 40 seconds. The sensor must be full of process fluid at typical process temperature and fluid density during the zeroing procedure. if the transmitter has a display. Influences on the meter zero are described starting on page 214.Appendix E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed E. Although the zeroing time and number of tube cycles can be specified by the user. • Using a HART Communicator. The ∆tzero value is then used in Equation E-1 for computing the mass flow rate. It takes approximately 40 seconds for the tube to vibrate a total of 2048 cycles. If it is not properly done it may introduce error. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent ∆t measurements (∆tflow). the average flow indication under no-flow Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 197 . performing the zeroing procedure while valves are not fully closed can result in an incorrect ∆tzero value. E.

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

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

8. and density) should also be recorded. If a zero offset creates an error that exceeds the acceptable accuracy tolerance. Rezero the meter (Section E. 6.1 lb/min. The average process conditions (temperature. resulting in a meter factor of 0. zero offset errors should be minimized. refer to Section E. If the measurement error cannot be made to be within acceptable limits. 4. For example. Before the next proving the meter was rezeroed and the zero offset of +1 lb/min was eliminated. to track the meter’s zero performance over time.2).2) if the measurement error exceeds acceptable tolerance. 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. checking of the meter could then be discontinued.9980. the meter should be able to continue to operate without rezeroing as long as the operating flow rate is not reduced substantially. If the meter zero is consistently within tolerance over a period of one year. 3. pressure. Examples are provided below which illustrate cases where meter proving is needed and where meter proving is not needed. determined from zero readings accumulated over a 30 to 60 second time period. Reinitiate flow through the meter. 2. Use Equation E-2.9980 would still be used and the meter output would be 200 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . If desired. If desired. if the meter had a zero offset of 0. 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 204. the meter must be rezeroed to bring it into tolerance. Halt flow through the meter. record both sets of data — before and after zeroing — and indicate on the meter zero chart that the meter was rezeroed. E.0%. Record the average zero value. double check to make sure valves are closed and there is no flow through the meter). whereas an operating flow rate of 100 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0.2. To evaluate the need for rezeroing. Proper rezeroing of the meter will eliminate large zero offset errors. to calculate the measurement error from the average zero value and the operating flow rate. and follow these steps: 1. This may require bypassing flow around the meter (see Section E.7 Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? When the meter is initially put into service it must be zeroed and proved. View the meter’s zero reading (see Section E. the meter factor of 0. If the meter was not reproved. (Prior to rezeroing. 7. If the meter was rezeroed. page 198).1%. Restore any modifications to low-flow cutoff or damping to their original values. and a 10 lb/min operating flow rate would result in a measurement error of 1.01%. The meter would be reading high by 0. By operating the meter within a 10:1 turndown from its maximum specified flow rate.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? E. It is best to select a meter that will operate in its upper flow range.2%. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until the measurement error is within acceptable limits.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.3. 9. Now the meter has no zero offset error. record the data collected from step 3 on form E-1. page 199. 5. reducing the need to rezero the meter. an operating flow rate of 1000 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. page 197. contact the factory.

Apply the following procedure in between provings: a. The meter is rezeroed and afterwards the zero is checked again. 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.3. 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. the rezeroing maintenance procedure for the Coriolis meter could be eliminated. Any meter zeroing procedure should also include viewing the meter’s zero reading to make sure that zeroing is really needed. c. Routine checks during proving would still be warranted. Use Equation E-2. Make sure to replace the old low flow cutoff after the proving session is complete. Repeat the procedure outline in Step 1a.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. From this example it is easy to see why proving would be required after the meter was rezeroed to determine the correct meter factor. The new offset is +0.05 lb/min zero offset. In the majority of applications the meter will never need to be rezeroed. until the zero is within tolerance. d. In this case. The meter zero is checked after 2 weeks and is found to be offset by +0. Since the meter is being monitored and excessive zero offsets are eliminated when they arise.) Record the new zero offset on the proving sheet. If necessary.03 lb/min. If the zero offset is excessive. 1. However. page 199. there is potential for incorrectly zeroing the meter if valves are not fully closed.5 lb/min. 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. 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. Prior to proving the meter the zero is checked. to determine if this zero offset value is excessive. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 201 . so care must be taken in adopting a meter zeroing procedure. (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. 2. rezero the meter. page 198. to make sure it has not drifted to make the meter fall out of acceptable tolerances. Prove the meter. above. Based on the examples above. If the zero has shifted excessively.2%. one may conclude that they should just establish a program to rezero the meter on a regular basis. b. A program has been put into place to check the meter zero every 2 weeks. It is determined that this zero offset would not require rezeroing the meter. Zero offset readings from all intermediate zero checks should be recorded. It is determined that the error due to this offset is insignificant for the operating flow rate of 500 lb/min. the meter does not need to be reproved every time it is rezeroed. Check the meter zero as described in Step 1a. b.1 lb/min. and it is found that there is a –0. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. Check the zero offset using Equation E2. During a proving session do the following: a. above. If the zero offset does not create an excessive error leave it alone. page 199.1% error at a flow rate of 500 lb/min. c. d. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. This would result in a +0. Determine the meter’s average zero reading using the procedure described in Section E. The meter is checked again after the next 2 week period and found to be offset by +0. If necessary rezero the meter.

The net error would be 400 lb. both in and out of the cavern. • Before zeroing. page 217).000 lb of product flows into the cavern and 100. assume that 100. Flowing into the cavern. The average zero offset must fall within Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. The normal operating flow rate is 500 lb/min. The guidelines below should be followed when using a Coriolis master meter.000 lb of product flows into the cavern at a rate of 500 lb/min and 100.800 lb. most cavern storage applications have widely varying flow rates.2% error out). As flow rate decreases the zero uncertainty component increases. However. Not having the meter properly zeroed can result in large errors. If the meter has been zeroed properly.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of only 100 lb/min. the meter would register 100.200 and flowing out it would deduct only 99. The total uncertainty for an ELITE master meter is obtained from the following equation: 202 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The net error would be 1200 lb. It is important to make sure the meter is properly zeroed. The master meter uncertainty is the composite of the base uncertainty and the zero uncertainty. if the meter is not properly zeroed. The average zero offset should also fall with Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2.2% error in and –0.200 lb and flowing out the meter would deduct only 99. unloading and cavern storage. • It is also recommended that the test meter’s zero offset be checked as described in Section E.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of 500 lb/min (+0.3. Also assume that the same +1 lb/min zero offset (+0. the meter factor should not change significantly between the forward and reverse direction. different proving meter factors can be obtained for the forward and reverse flow directions. As an illustration. the master meter must be full of process fluid at the normal process temperature. which results in a +0. The best way to eliminate these types of errors is to establish a meter zeroing procedure in conjunction with meter proving. Flowing into the cavern. Determining different meter factors for the forward and reverse direction is of little use if the flow rate is varying significantly. To compound the problem. Assume that 100. • The master meter offset should be checked as described in Section E. It has been verified experimentally that a Coriolis meter’s flow calibration factor is unaffected by flow direction. A zero offset will affect the accuracy of the meter and will be passed on to the meter being proved.2% error in the reverse flow direction.000 lb. the meter would register 100.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E.2% error in and –1. E.3. • 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. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications.2% error in the forward flow direction and a –0. Cavern Storage Example A meter has a +1 lb/min zero offset that has not been characterized.0% error out). page 198. Special consideration should be given to the meter zero for these types of applications.8 Zero Considerations for Bi-directional Flow The meter is often used to measure bidirectional flow for loading. page 217).9 Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Proper meter zeroing is critical for Coriolis master meters. page 198. The following hypothetical case is presented to illustrate some key points. especially in applications where the flow rate fluctuates greatly. • The master meter must be zeroed every time it is moved to a new location. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications.

E-3) Zero Stability Uncertainty% = ± 0. Substitute the uncertainty and the zero stability into Equation E-3 and solve for the mass flow rate: 0.25%. it is specified that the maximum allowable uncertainty is ±0.25 lb/min. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 203 .Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E (Eq.1% + --------------------------------------------.1% + --------------------------------------------. the zero stability is ±0.25% or less. the mass flow rate must equal or exceed 166.7 lb/min.7 lb/min In order to achieve an uncertainty of ±0.25 lb/min ± 0.* 100 Mass Flow Rate Minimum mass flow rate = 166. The proving flow rate must exceed the minimum mass flow rate of both the test meter and master meter.25 % = ± 0. For example. If the master meter is a CMF300.* 100 Mass Flow Rate It is recommended that a minimum allowable flow rate for both the master meter and the test meter be established.

E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Form E-1. Average Zero Reading (lb/min) Date: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Zero Offset Factor (%) 0.00 Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. Meter Zero Chart Location Sensor Model Sensor Serial No.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate 204 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .00 Operating Flow Rate: Was meter rezeroed? 0. Fluid Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.

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

206 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

F-2) · m = Kcal ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) * ( 1 – KT * 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 .0001 * T ) * [ 1 + K P * 0. Equation F-1 can be modified. Sensor Interface Transmitter Signal processing Precision oscillator Microprocess or Frequency ρ Counter Inlet pickoff Signal amplifier Pickoff comparator Outlet pickof Signal amplifier Outputs Drive coil Drive control Q q Analog (4-20 mA) · m M RS-485/ RS-232 Flow tube temperature Temperature amplifier A/D converter T Alarm External pressure (optional) Analog or HART A/D converter P (optiona where · m Kcal ∆t = Mass flow rate (g/s) = Meter calibration constant (g/s/µs) = Time difference between pickoff signals (µs) Taking into account the effects of temperature and pressure on the sensor and meter zeroing.Mass Flow Measurement Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Measurement F Figure F-3. RFT9739 signal processing block diagram. The equation used for determining the mass flow rate of the fluid flowing through the meter is shown as Equation F-2. (Eq.

Table F-1 lists pressure coefficients for Micro Motion flow sensors that are affected by pressure. Pressure coefficient. The pressure components of Equation F-2. Sensor Model D300 and DL200 D600 and DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient*. for information about zeroing the meter. and for Model DL sensors.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The values ∆tzero. The value of the calibration constant is determined when the meter is calibrated. the tube becomes more elastic. However. Pressure coefficients for flow. which would be interpreted as a decrease in the mass flow rate. which would be interpreted as an increase in the mass flow rate. Calibration constant. The temperature signal from the RTD mounted on the flow tube is used by the transmitter to correct for the effect of temperature variations. 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 value of the correction coefficient varies from one sensor size to the next. Key parameters of Equation F-2 are discussed below.009 0. page 195. KP — The pressure coefficient compensates for the influence of fluid pressure on the stiffness of the flow tube. increasing the temperature of the flow tube will cause it to deflect a greater amount. where it is used in the calculation of the mass flow rate. The larger the sensor. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. determined by zeroing the Coriolis meter at startup. are used only for specific sensors and applications that warrant pressure compensation. As temperature decreases. KP 0.0006 *Percent offset per psi pressure F. the larger the value of this factor. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. Each sensor model behaves somewhat differently when fluid properties change. the tube becomes stiffer.) The need for pressure correction is dependent on the sensor size and model. and is independent of changes in fluid properties. Table F-1. page 209. Pmeas and Pcal). Under conditions of constant mass flow rate.) Temperature coefficient. KT — The temperature coefficient compensates for the influence of tube temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube material.79% per 100°C change in temperature. the flow tube becomes stiffer. 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. Pressure correction is generally required only for 2-inch and larger sensors.0002 0. The unit of measure is grams per second flow per microsecond of time difference (g/s/µs).26% per 100°C change in temperature.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The Coriolis force depends only on the mass flow rate of the fluid. 210 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . As temperature increases. KT and T (obtained from the sensor RTD). (Refer to Appendix E. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. tzero — The zero value represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs under no-flow conditions.005 0. are always used in the mass flow rate computation. As pressure increases. (Pressure input is shown in the lower functional blocks in Figure F-3. The value of the temperature coefficient is different for different flow tube materials. increasing the pressure inside the flow tube will cause it to deflect less. making it more difficult to be deflected.0008 0. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. The pressure measurement from an external pressure transducer can be input to the transmitter. page 209 (KP . The factor is different for each individual sensor. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. Meter zero.

temperature and pressure are the primary influence factors on mass flow measurement.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.5 2 Mass flow rate error (%) 1. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. to minimize or eliminate their influence on the accuracy of the meter. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. The magnitude of these influences will vary from one sensor design to another. Influences on Tube Stiffness Variations in temperature and pressure will change the flexibility or stiffness of the oscillating tube. Since the mass flow rate has not Figure F-4. 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. wall thickness. page 209. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. The descriptions of these influences presented in the following sections are based on the current understanding of the sensor dynamics.5 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 316L Hastelloy C-22 Temperature (°F) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 211 . as more research is conducted and subtleties of the meters’ operation are better understood. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect. 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. The effects of temperature and pressure are systematic and can be characterized and compensated for. and depends on tube material. and geometric design.5 1 0. As indicated by Equation F2. which increases the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly on page 210. 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. there will be a measurement error. The effects of temperature on the mass flow rate measurement is a linear effect. This will lead to a change in the ∆t between the pickoffs. As temperature increase the tube will become more elastic. which will cause the relative offset between the two sides of the oscillating tube to vary. Assuming a constant mass flow rate.5 0 -0. 2. These explanations are likely to be expanded in the future. and can be readily characterized.

page 214. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation. 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. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. diameter. and DL200 sensors are significantly impacted by pressure. CEQ 6079 transmitter is capable only of reading pressure from a HART Bell 202 output. However. and F-6b. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy.3 -0. CMF200. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing).1 Mass flow rate error (%) 0 -0. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress (acting perpendicular to the tube wall).1 -0. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. 0. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor.4 -0. Table F-1. DL100. Figures F-6a. D600. geometry. In bent-tube designs. The flow tube wall thickness.2 0.2 -0. and CMF300 sensors is an order of magnitude less than for the Model D sensors. which reduces the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed.) Figure F-5. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter. Only Model D300.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 CMF300 D600 Pressure (psig) 212 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The transmitter then automatically compensates for pressure. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the mass flow rate measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. However. The effect on ELITE CMF100. show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter. and a pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. Figure F-5 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. page 210. page 213.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.

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

because it is likely that a more accurate zero value could be obtained. see Appendix E. or zero uncertainty. which is the nominal uncertainty equation for Coriolis meters.) the meter a number of times in succession under constant process conditions. The zero value that is determined (∆tzero) is subtracted from all subsequent time difference measurements (∆tflow). The remaining ∆t represents the true mass flow rate. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input. represents the maximum anticipated variation in the meter’s stored zero. for a stable set of process and installation conditions. 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.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Figure F-6b. (For additional information about meter zeroing. 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 . page 209. the baseline offset between the pickoff sensors under no-flow conditions is determined. 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. This calculation is presented in Equation F-2. page 195. The meter’s zero stability. This process is called zeroing the meter. 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.

1 Nominal meter uncertainty (%) 0.8 -1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Nominal full-scale flow rate (%) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 215 .15% for Model D sensors) Zero Stability = Determined from individual sensor specifications Mass Flow Rate = Operating flow rate From Equation F-3. Once the amount of zero offset has been determined. 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. This relationship is illustrated in Figure F-7. page 216. determined from individual sensor specifications (±0. a zero offset will skew the nominal meter uncertainty.4 -0.10% for ELITE sensors. Generally. 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. 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 amount of zero offset can be determined by halting flow through the meter completely.6 -0. Figure F-7.10% or ±0. 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.15%) from the sensor’s specified maximum flow rate down to a flow rate of zero. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing.4 0.* 100 Mass Flow Rate where Base Uncertainty = Accuracy of sensor. expressed as a percentage.8 0. this difference is very small. If the meter is zeroed perfectly. page 198). the measurement error can be calculated using Equation F-4.6 0. which represents the nominal uncertainty boundaries for a Coriolis meter. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor. and the meter calibration will fall within the base uncertainty (±0.2 -0.2 0 -0. the transmitter will capture the “true zero” value.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F (Eq. as described below. However. However. assuming that a “normal” zero value has been captured by the transmitter. and reading the meter’s mass flow rate indication (as described in Section E. ±0.3. F-3) Zero Stability Nominal Uncertainty (%) = ± Base Uncertainty (%) + --------------------------------------------.

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

Zero uncertainty specifications. % = Zero stability. Any zero offset error is eliminated by rezeroing the meter at the new process temperature.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Table F-2. typically do not require rezeroing. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 217 .016 ±0.10 ±0. The need for rezeroing will depend upon the characteristics of the sensor. Table F-2 also lists the meter base uncertainty and zero stability values. therefore.025 ±0. °C It should be kept in mind that Equation F-5 describes the maximum uncertainty for all sensors. and can be used to compute the total meter uncertainty for varying operating temperatures. Not every sensor will exhibit this amount of error. Assessing the need for rezeroing is described in Appendix E.000 Base Uncertainty (%) ±0.00125 ±0. °C Tzero = Temperature at which the meter was zeroed. [A] Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Nominal Full-Scale Flow Rate (lb/min) 500 1600 5000 25. pressure. the less impact a zero offset will have. ELITE meters should be selected because they have lower zero offset uncertainty versus temperature than Model D meters. lb/min = Zero offset uncertainty for the effect of temperature on the meter zero. Such applications generally have steady process conditions (temperature.15 [B] Zero Stability (lb/min) ±0.08 ±0.5 [C] Zero Offset Uncertainty for Temperature Effect* (lb/min/ °C) ±0. and the magnitude of their impact will vary greatly from one application to the next. The higher the operating flow rate.25 ±2. lb/min/ °C Toperating = Operating process fluid temperature.5 *Worst-case zero offset due to process fluid temperature change away from the zeroing temperature. Temperature-related zero offset errors will be minimized by rezeroing the meter. page 195. The total uncertainty for the meter’s mass flow measurement is determined using Equation F-5 and the values in Table F-2. Legal trade requirements prohibit rezeroing the meter. Other Influences The following sections discuss other process variables and installation conditions that might affect the accuracy of the meter. the amount of temperature variation and the operating flow rates. F-5) 2 2 B + ( C * Toperating – T zero ) A + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. For applications that require a larger turndown. unless the meter calibration is recertified.10 ±0.* 100 Total Uncertainty (%) = ± Operating Mass Flow Rate where A B C = Base uncertainty. product composition) and.05 ±0. These influences are not well defined.10 ±0. (Eq.

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

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

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

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

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

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

224 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass Figure G-3. Temperature and pressure are the primary factors that affect flow tube stiffness. the net flow rate of one or more components in a multi-component mixture can also be determined. Portions of the following sections are the same as presented in Appendix F. obtained from the RTD. The tube temperature. Due to design variations.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Because a Coriolis meter operates like a vibrating spring/mass system. If the tube temperature increases.1. 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. peripheral devices are available that provide additional information about the process fluid. the flow rate of oil in an oil-water emulsion can be determined. its density measurement will be affected by changes in tube stiffness. and a subsequent increase in the density indication.06 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. 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 . is used to correct the natural frequency measurement for temperature related changes in the elastic modulus of the flow tube material. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly in Section G. 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.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy increase in the tube period.) G. mass.04 0. and damping. the tube will become more elastic. In addition to providing density. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters.02 0 -0. 0. page 225. each sensor model and size will behave somewhat differently when fluid properties change. (For example.08 Density error (g/cc) 0.

the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G of the system has not changed. The effect of temperature on the density measurement can be characterized. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. resulting in a decrease in the tube period and a subsequent decrease in the indicated density. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. Figure G-3 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s density measurement if no temperature compensation were used. However.00010 -0.26% per 100°C change in temperature. The signal from the pressure transducer is input to the RFT9739. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress Figure G-4. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. which increases the tube frequency. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. page 230. and the density measurement can be corrected. A pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter.00010 Density error (g/cc) 0. The flow tube wall thickness.00020 -0. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. divide the density error by the operating density and multiply by 100. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. diameter. A pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the sensor as possible. page 226. as shown in Equations G-8 and G-9. 0. To obtain the error percentage. Pressure effect on density measurement — no pressure compensation. This would result in an increase in the tube period. Figure G-4 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed.79% per 100°C change in temperature. which automatically compensates for pressure effects using Equation G-10. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. However. geometry. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect.00000 -0. 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 . In bent-tube designs. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. The influence of pressure on the CMF300 density measurement is an order of magnitude less than it is for the D600. and a subsequent increase in the density indication.

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

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

The frequency of vibration of the sensor flow tubes is lower when the flow tubes are oriented upward than when they are oriented downward. K1 and K2 = Represent the measured tube periods determined when the meter is calibrated on air and water.003 0.000 6. Therefore. 0. page 226. page 230. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement — CMF300 with no compensation. if possible. The FD algorithm is based on the measured density of the calibration process fluid. The mechanism for this influence is not well understood. Fluid Flow Rate Increasing fluid flow rate causes the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes to decrease. all earlier RFT9739 versions use a K3 value.000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) 10. Therefore. it uses an FD compensation value.005 Density error (g/cc) 0.6 or later. ρcorrected The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. 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. but appears to be related to variations in gravitational forces. Figure G-6 illustrates the effect of increasing fluid flow rate on the density measurement of a CMF300.002 0. beyond this point the error increases exponentially. respectively. more accurate. If the RFT9739 has software version 3.001 0.000 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 232 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . and lowest when the tubes are oriented downward. It is recommended to use this FD value. For flow rates less than 50% of the nominal flow rate (the CMF300 nominal flow rate is 5. however. The magnitude of the effect of fluid flow rate varies from one sensor to the next. 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-6.000 lb/min).000 0 2. the density reading is greatest when the tubes are oriented upward. the effect is not linear. rather than the FD value listed in Table G-2. however. the K3 value listed in Table G-2 may be used. This results in an increase in the tube period and a subsequent increase in the density indication. and G-8. The effect generally decreases with increasing sensor size. The influence of fluid flow rate is negligible at low flow rates and increases with increasing flow rate. The K3 algorithm is based on water as the flowing medium. G-7.004 0. The RFT9739 uses a three-point flowingdensity calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density.000 4. For older RFT9739 transmitters.000 8. Sensor Orientation If the orientation of the sensor is changed. there will be a shift in the meter’s density reading.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy where = Determined from Equation G-10. therefore. and is. the flow rate effect on density is insignificant. (K1 and K2 should not be confused with the constants Ca and Cb presented in Equations G-6.

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

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

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

which results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes.04 0. the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure.120 Density error (g/cc) g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 0. However.114 0. ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22. Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions.116 0.00 0.06 0.112 0. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion. Also. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube. 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. additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube. select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes.10 0. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. your sales representative or the factory for questions about material suitability.08 Initial wall thickness 0. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure. the impact of corrosion on a Coriolis meter is complicated by the vibration of the flow tubes. which illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. stresses. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material. which will cause a localized increase in the fluid density. However. Corrosion Figure G-8. a crack will initiate at a pit. 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.110 0. In this type of corrosion. Figure G-8. also illustrates the effect of material loss due to corrosion. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form.108 Wall thickness (in) 236 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Once a crack has begun. If the velocity of the flow tube wall approaches the velocity of sound in the process fluid. there will be localized compression of the fluid at the tube wall. 0. For additional resistance to corrosion. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement — ELITE® CMF300 sensor.02 0. A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data.118 0.

This phenomenon should not impact Micro Motion meters.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G The velocity of sound influence is a problem for density meters that have a high flow tube velocity — those with a high operating frequency or large tube displacements. Therefore.2 in/sec = 1.003125 seconds per one-half tube cycle) Total Displacement Tube Velocity = --------------------------------------------------------1 -.00625 seconds per tube cycle. is provided below. Velocity of sound.06 in = ---------------------------------0. A simplified calculation. and have low tube displacements (less than 0. 0.03-inch peak displacement). which operate at low frequencies (less than 160 Hz — see Table G-3.) Total displacement = 0. The velocity of sound in liquids is significantly higher than in gases. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 237 . The velocity of the Coriolis meter flow tube is approximately 350 times less than the velocity of sound of pentane. Hydrocarbon product Pentane n-Butane CO2 Propane Velocity of sound* (ft/sec) 598 676 842 857 *Velocity when product temperature is 30°F. (Eq. it is very unlikely that velocity of sound influences would create a density measurement error for Micro Motion Coriolis meters. 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. because the vibrating frequency is generally much lower than 160 Hz. (This calculation is quite conservative.003125 sec = 19.( Tube Period ) 2 0. page 234).6 ft/sec The velocity of sound for gases can be determined from Equation G-12. Table G-4.06 inches (the tube will move from peak to peak in onehalf tube cycle) Tube frequency = 160 Hz (equal to approximately 0. which approximates the flow tube velocity for a Micro Motion meter.

238 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

240 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Because the volumetric flow rate is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. corrosion. an increase in temperature results in a decreased volume indication. and G-3. as shown in Equation H-1. The following sections illustrate the impact of temperature. Temperature Figure H-1 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement for stainless steel and Hastelloy sensors with no temperature compensation. the calculated volume will be affected by all of the parameters that affect the mass and density measurements (described in detail in Appendices F. sensor orientation.000. page 228. page 211. for details concerning other effects. In order to understand how the mass flow measurements are made. vibration. page 223. and velocity of sound. A brief discussion of zero influences is also included. Refer to Appendices F. From Equation H-1. flow profile. H. the effect of temperature on density is of larger magnitude than the effect on mass flow rate. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1.1 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement Since Coriolis meters provide independent mass flow and density measurements. it can be seen that an increase in temperature causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to increase. The influences described below explain how the combination of mass and density influences affect the volume measurement. 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. and flow rate on the volume measurement. Referring back to Figures F-4. and G. 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.Appendix H Volume Measurement H. and any influence that results in an increase in the indicated density will cause a decrease in the indicated volume. for density. (Eq. page 205. 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 . and G. refer to Appendix F. coating. viscosity. erosion. such as: entrained gas. page 205. density. However. page 223. page 205. Thus. volumetric flow can be determined. page 223). pressure. see Appendix G.

2 -0.0 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1. 0. Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation. Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.1 -0.000 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .2 0.2 -0.4 -0.3 -0.0 -4.000 -6.1 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0 -0.H Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Figure H-1. Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement — CMF300 no compensation.0 316L Hastelloy C-22 -2.000 Figure H-3.0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Temperature (°F) Figure H-2. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters.4 0 20 40 60 Pressure (psig) 80 100 D600 CMF300 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.3 -0.1 -0. 2. 0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) -0.0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0.5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.

The impact of pressure can be compensated for. However.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.000. an increase in flow rate results in a decreased volume indication. Zero Influences Changes in the meter zero will affect the meter’s mass flow rate measurement. as described in detail in Appendix F. resulting in a subsequent increase in the volumetric flow rate measurement. Thus. The RFT9739 uses a threepoint flowing-density calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density and. for additional information about compensating for this effect. A positive zero offset will cause an increase in the mass flow rate measurement. Fluid Flow Rate Figure H-3 illustrates the effect of fluid flow rate on the meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement for a CMF300 sensor. page 195. the effect of pressure on density is much smaller than the effect on mass flow rate.000. page 214. it can be seen that an increase in pressure causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to decrease. Zeroing requirements are discussed in Appendix E.. for additional information about zero influences on mass flow measurement. with no pressure compensation. resulting in a subsequent decrease in the volumetric flow rate measurement. a negative zero offset will cause a decrease in the mass flow rate measurement. Referring back to Figures F-5. Referring back to Figure G-6. as described on page 212 for mass flow measurement. starting on page 214. Refer to Section G. an increase in pressure results in a decreased volume indication. page 229. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 243 . and G-4. and on page 229 for density measurement. page 228. page 212.2. volume. it can be seen that an increase in flow rate causes the density indication to increase. Thus. subsequently. Conversely. page 232. Refer to Meter Zero Influences. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. calibrated at 20 psig.

244 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

246 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

The D600 data was analyzed using the pass grouping method illustrated by Figure 8-9.012 1. These data illustrate the repeatability results becoming significantly poorer at higher flow rates.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.998 0. In order to use Equation I-1 the meter factors for an initial group of proving passes must be determined. 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. page 248.0 0.996 0.0 25000 Meter factor 1. Shown are typical results for a Model D600 sensor and an RFT9739 transmitter with a 24-inch Compact™ Prover. The meter factors for the individual proving passes. Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate.2. along with the pass-to-pass repeatability.004 1.2 0. Equation I-1 was then applied to the first 30 proving passes at each flow rate shown in Figure I-1. for each flow rate.4 1.6 0.010 1.Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I. This analysis determined the number of passes per run that provided repeatability of less than 0. page 102.000 0. Figure I-1 shows proving data from a D600 sensor proved with a 24-inch Compact Prover.8 0.002 1. are shown in Figure I-1.4 0. Thirty prover passes are recommended for this initial group. Figure I-1. 1.8 1.008 1. The results of these two analysis methods are presented in Table I-1.992 0.6 1.05%. 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.2 1.994 0. The following is an example of how Equation I-1 can be applied. at a variety of flow rates.006 1.

repeatability is used as the criteria for defining how many proving passes per run are required.038 12 15 0. Therefore. PulsesMAX = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the greatest number of pulses.2 Derivation of Equation I-1 The measure of whether a proving is acceptable or not is the proving repeatability.4 13.45 seconds — below the recommended minimum of 0. correlate very well with the pass grouping method.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 16.3 2.044 5 5 0. it was predicted that 51 proving passes would be required.139 0. At the highest flow rate of 24. Repeatability criteria ≤ 0. The actual test data showed that repeatability of less than 0. At this flow rate.042 6 3 0. Details of transfer standard proving procedures are presented in Section 3.67 seconds. It was determined that the meter and prover were incompatible at this flow rate.299 lb/min. page 247. Twenty passes is typically considered to be the practical limit for the number of passes per group.080 0.019 3 15 0.040 4 3 0. This involves proving the transfer standard meter against the prover.3 Pass-to-pass repeatability (%) 0. page 104. R 248 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . page 30.3. In instances such as the one described above.6 1.867 lb/min and less.126 0.117 0.067 0.239 0. for flow rates of 19. where the prover is undersized and adequate repeatability cannot be obtained.605 1. The values in Equation I-2 are obtained by performing a series of proving passes. PulsesMIN = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the fewest number of pulses.* 100 Pulses AVG where = Repeatability is given as a percentage (not a decimal) value. I-2) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN R(%) = -----------------------------------------------------------.4 5. Because there are no volume limitations with master meter proving. then proving the Coriolis meter against the transfer standard meter. I. page 247).039 5 10 0.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 Table I-1. the proving duration can be set to any desired length of time. (Eq. the prerun time was only 0. Typical results using a Model D600 sensor and RFT9739 transmitter. Issues related to using transfer standard meters and volumetric master meters are discussed in Section 8.2 3. Proving repeatability for volumetric flowmeters is generally calculated as shown in Equation I-2.3 2. transfer standard proving may be required.05% Passes per run Repeatability from grouped from Passes per run data grouped data from Equation I-1 5 0.0 1. proved with a 24” Compact™ Prover (Results from Figure I-1. Number of passes per run. PulsesAVG = The average number of pulses per proving pass is obtained by summing the pulses accumulated from all of the proving passes.5.05% could not be obtained within 20 prover passes.049 4 5 0.031 12 10 0.153 0.667 The predictions of Equation I-1.326 0. then dividing by the number of passes.

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

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

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

252 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

126 computing proving computer feature 62 density measurement 64. 104 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 84 repeatability 103 response time output signals 53 pipe prover 89 small volume prover 99 troubleshooting 136 troubleshooting 135. 122 steel pipe prover 87 small volume prover 96 uncertainty 126 volumetric tank proving 81 temperature meter factor calculation 22. 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. 236 crosstalk 135 orientation 41 pipe stresses 39 vibration 233 Correction factor 147. 91 Coriolis master meters 118 gravimetric tank proving 78 small volume prover 103.Index Conversion factor density 156. 182 time units 52 volume measurement 18 Coriolis sensor 208 components 225 corrosion 221. 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 . 158 density measurement device 64 density proving calculation 155 determining mass meter factor 122. 24 volume measurement 17 temperature and pressure measurements 29 thermal expansion 18. 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. 229 meter factor calculation 20. 22 proving computer features 62 volume measurement 17. 230 buoyancy 172. 159 zero reading 198 Density averager manufacturers 254 proving procedures density meter 25 transfer standard 31 volume 29 troubleshooting 135 Density factor xxiii. 29 mass flow 24. 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. 182 meter factor calculation 73 uncertainty 74. 18. 123 field proving 147 flow tube changes 161 inventory calculations 128 laboratory analysis 147 mass measurement 22. 32 prover steel 26 proving calculations density 26. 141 calculating 156 correcting density reading 146. 11. 187 proving 172.

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. 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. 225 density measurement device 65 density measurement recommendations 159 mass flow measurement 207 meter density accuracy 229–236 meter recommendations 133 operating frequencies 219 pressure effect 243 pressure influences 212. 17 recommendations 133. 161 in-line 22 mass measurement 25–27. 237 Density sampling container 26 installation 153 line 147. 233 maximum volume proving 24 meter density accuracy 232 minimizing external influences 42 minimum volume proving 20 reproducibility 136 required number of passes 247 small volume prover 92 volumetric flow rate accuracy 243 volumetric master meter 111 mass analog output 48 Coriolis meters 3. See Pickoff detectors Flow measurement analog output 48 custody transfer 9. 150. 203 operating expected 107 maximum xxi. 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 142.1 Density meter 4 API standard 153 calibration 65 density measurement device 64 field proving 146. 147 fluid flow rate 136. 35 damping 54 mass measurement 22 meter factor calculation 113 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 257 . 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. 213 repeatability specification 125 F Flow detectors. 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. 53 nominal 202 normal 11 procedures 105 prover size recommendations 90 required number of runs 123 pressure effect on mass 212 proving 5.

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

101 volume measurement 32 reproducibility 126. 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. 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. 72 volumetric flow rate 4. 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. 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. 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 . 123 measurement devices 64 meter proving 10 pressure 136.1 flow rate measurement 241 fluid flow rate 136. 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. 243 proving devices 65 proving equipment 25. 124 number of proving runs 90. 151 proving instruments 61 proving procedure 26. 100 prover prerun 99 tank volume 83 average 102. 71 volumetric proving 18 volumetric proving requirements 20 volumetric tank proving 79 Meter factor xxi accuracy Coriolis master meter 111. 27. 122–123. 32 mass meter factor 122. 161 inventory calculations 128–130 mass xxiii. 27. 85–87. 122 prover volume 4. 247 flow tube changes 137. 112 erosion 90. 28 recommendations 159 reproducibility 158 required equipment 79 RFT9739 transmitter 133 small volume prover uncertainty 97 small volume provers 94 volume measurement 29. 71. 45 volumetric master meter uncertainty 109 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 81. 161 inventory calculations 129 mass measurement 22. 136 rezeroing 200 temperature measurement 63 time between provings 12 transfer standard meter 104 trend chart 12.

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

229 mass flow 212. 103 reproducibility 126. 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. 99 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 stationary conventional pipe prover 85 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19.1 mass flow measurement 208. 117 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 master meter proving 106 meter proving 12 proving calculations 29 repeatability 90. 92. 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. 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 . See also HART Communicator calibration 158 communication configuration 46–48. 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. 100 small volume prover 91. 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. 144 calibration 9. 243 tube stiffness 211 Process conditions xxii. 209 meter zero influences 214 zeroing 197 Pressure coefficient 210. See HART protocol. 57 meter zeroing 197 troubleshooting with 135 using for simulation 53 volume measurement 30 Protocol. 212 prover volume 23 sensor 229 volume 242. 20 proving computer 61 volume base xxiii meter factor calculation 80. 95 pulse interpolation 93 volume measurement minimum volume proving 19 prerun xxii. 143 density proving 151 meter information 47. 26 optical 94. 136 rezeroing 200. 86. 89 accumulating pulses 89 damping 55. 52. 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. 160 Coriolis meter proving 110. Modbus protocol Prover detectors density averaging device 65 density measurement 28 mass measurement 23. 143 connecting to transmitter 145 density measurement density device 65 digital output 46.

29. 150. 117 average meter factors 102 damping factor 111. 26. 153 calibration 161 density factor 156. 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. 98 recommendations 134. 150 density sampling loop 151 repeatability 160 R Repeatability 123–125 Coriolis master meter 118 cross-talk 219 custody transfer 5 damping factor 91. 94 conventional prover 25. 158. 94 proving recommendations 134 volume meter factor 121 Proving method 71. 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. 17 mass meter factor 122 meter factor calculation 85. 65 flow rate 71 in-line 71 meter factor uncertainty 125 proving connections 42 volume meter factor 121 volumetric xxii. 155 calculations 155 density measurement 146. 147 density proving installations 149 procedure 154 recommendations 159 pass 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. 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. 160 repeatability 125. pass accumulating pulses 110. See also Proving. 160 density measurement 64 density proving density measurement 154 density proving calculations 155 density proving device 65 density proving installations 148. 249 number of proving runs 90 262 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 29. 152. 94. 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. 249 repeatable output 117 temperature 90. 148. 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. 30 Proving technique 35 Coriolis master meter 113 reproducibility 128 volumetric master meter 106 Pycnometer xxiii.Index Proving density 149. 248. 26 predicting 247–250 small volume prover 25.

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. 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. Model D sensor. 106 transfer standard proving 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 263 . 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. 89. 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. 160 vibration 218 volume measurement 20. Pickoff sensors T Temperature accuracy 241 coefficient 210 correction coefficient 226 effect density 18. 27. 99 reproducibility 136 tank proving 90 digital density 144 flow measurement 53 pressure measurement 213. See Coriolis sensor. 210.1 poor with leakage 89 pressure devices 152 prover size 90. 214 pressure effect density factor offset 161 density measurement 229. 136. 32 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 83 Reproducibility 126. 213. 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. ELITE sensor. 142 Sensor. 232. 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. 127 density factors 158 meter factors 136 Response time analog density 145 Coriolis master meter 111. 22. 228 flow rate accuracy 241 meter mass flow accuracy 208. 160 damping factor prerun duration 56.

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

.

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

- DEP Metering for Liquid Hydrocarbon (00000002)
- Fusible Plug Loop Panel1
- SCOPE OF SERVICE FOR RE‐CERTIFICATION OF PROV
- EIL Spec for Instrumentation Works
- Calibration of Air Pollution
- ASTM C204 Blaine Cemento
- NT2-L3-G-GC_GN-69-00001_B
- List Standards in Flow Metering
- C.1 M & TE Control Procedure
- PosiTector6000 v6.2 BS
- AA Operating Instructions
- 44_Domestic Gas Meter Specification
- Comparison of Calculation Standards of NGL and LPG
- BP_Measurement Manual PART1
- Instrproving Coriolis for Custody
- German_road_standard.pdf
- 4fb3a54e-80dd-4a36-8a73-a861a8ac3783_DTS_CC_0709_ENG
- 291
- Calibrating Performance
- GMP 11 Calibration Intervals for Laboratory Standards.pdf
- ACFM
- MEDFAD
- Guideline to Map Calibration Process in SAP PM and QM Module
- Wtb Balances
- FM Waterspray
- 5-6B-217
- Manufacturing Technician
- f Matter
- Hardness Test Pro[1][1].
- TNC News Issue 1 2009 Tool Probe

Skip carousel

- tmp4E4B
- Tmp 2283
- As 1817.3-2002 Metallic Materials - Vickers Hardness Test Calibration of Reference Blocks
- Tmp 1353
- AS NZS 1591.1-1995 Acoustics - Instrumentation for audiometry Reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone.pdf
- As 60270-2001 High-Voltage Test Techniques - Partial Discharge Measurements
- tmp4D19
- HOUSE HEARING, 109TH CONGRESS - THE UNITED NATIONS OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM
- tmp878F
- As 2162.2-1998 Verification and Use of Volumetric Apparatus Guide to the Use of Piston-operated Volumetric AP
- As 5016-2004 Metallic Materials - Conversion of Hardness Values
- tmp850A
- As ISO 8253.1-2009 Acoustics - Audiometric Test Methods Basic Pure Tone Air and Bone Conduction Threshold Aud
- As 1544.4-2003 Methods for Impact Tests on Metals Calibration of the Testing Machine
- Horus Vision CATS Calibration & Training System Manual
- NASA Facts YF-23 and NASA Dryden
- 110103_Nassau FEB_ASCLD Plan of Remediation_Rev1
- As NZS 3580.2.2-2009 Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air Preparation of Reference Test Atmospher
- As 4250.4-1995 Liquid Hydrocarbons - Dynamic Measurement - Proving Systems for Volumetric Meters Temperature
- Field Artillery Journal - Nov 1946
- Tmp 3100
- As 2883-2000 Analysis of Metals - Procedures for the Setting Up Calibration and Standardization of Atomic Emi
- Healdsburg-City-of-Blower-Door-Guided-Air-Sealing-Rebate
- As NZS 2891.14.2-1999 Methods of Sampling and Testing Asphalt Field Density Tests - Determination of Field De
- Apollo Experience Report Flight Instrumentation Calibration
- As 4250.2-1995 Liquid Hydrocarbons - Dynamic Measurement - Proving Systems for Volumetric Meters Pipe Provers
- As 1815.1-2007 Metallic Materials - Rockwell Hardness Test Test Method (Scales a B C D E F G H K N T)
- As 1289.5.8.1-2007 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Comp Action and Density Tests - Dete
- As NZS CISPR 16.1.5-2004 Specification for Radio Disturbance and Immunity Measuring Apparatus and Methods Rad
- As NZS 2891.14.3-1999 Methods of Sampling and Testing Asphalt Field Density Tests - Calibration of Nuclear Th

Skip carousel

- As 1289.6.1.3-1998 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Strength and Consolidation Tests
- null
- tmp8A3D
- Time to Trash Government Intervention in Garbage Service, Cato Policy Analysis No. 331
- As 2148-2004 Milk and Liquid Milk Products - Density Hyrometers for Use in Products With a Surface Tension Of
- tmp5ACD
- tmpAE4D
- null
- tmpE44B
- tmpA848.tmp
- tmp9F2
- tmp2439.tmp
- Untitled
- SAFC Biosciences Research Report - Commercially Available Serum-Free Insect Media
- tmp7F75.tmp
- Army Aviation Digest - Jun 1955
- Phed Committee #1 June 29, 2009
- tmpDFA1.tmp
- tmpBAA5.tmp
- tmp9817.tmp
- As 1289.5.3.2-2004 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Comp Action and Density Tests - Dete
- Untitled
- As 1289.6.7.3-1999 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes Soil Strength and Consolidation Tests
- tmp5EA
- Untitled
- null
- null
- Untitled
- Untitled
- As 1774.6-2001 Refractories and Refractory Materials - Physical Test Methods Determination of True Density

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?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading