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

October 1998

Proving Coriolis Flowmeters

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

Foreward

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

.

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

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

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

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

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 10. . . . Meter Configured for Volume . . . . Transmitter Outputs and Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 . Meter Recommendations. . . .5 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3.4 Volume Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Uncertainty. . .6 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . 133 133 133 134 134 135 135 136 vi Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 9. . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poor Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . .Contents 9 Proving Calculations Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 or Higher . . . . . .2 9. . . . . . . . . . Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility . . . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Proving Troubleshooting .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

xiv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

8 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The calculated uncertainty of the calibration facility is better than ±0. densities. The weigh-scale readings are corrected for buoyancy effect. based on ISO 5168.2 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 proving process allows the user to correct the reading from the meter to provide the true quantity of fluid that went through the meter. 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. which falls under government Weights and Measures requirements. The meter is proved to ensure product inventory accounting is of the highest accuracy. a meter correction factor is determined. and (2) contract. The meter measurement being proved can be flow rate or density. and should be conducted when the operating conditions are most representative of the typical operating conditions. When a calibration is performed. it is beneficial to prove the meter under the different operating conditions. The calibration lab employs water as the flowing medium. This is accomplished by comparing the reading from the meter to a calibrated reference device. The Micro Motion calibration lab employs weigh scales whose calibration is traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). When a meter is proved in the field. Proving is usually performed under one set of conditions. Proving differs from calibration in that it is performed in the field under operating conditions. 2. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 9 .1 What Is Proving Versus Calibration? Calibration is typically performed in a laboratory at several different flow rates. 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.05%. to determine if different meter factors are needed for each set of conditions. under which a contractual agreement between a buyer and seller specifies requirements. If the operating conditions vary significantly during operation. and to verify that meter accuracy is within specification over a range of flow rates. the density calibration factors for the meter are also determined. Custody transfer flow measurements are performed for accounting of product quantities in order to establish monetary value of deliveries between sellers and buyers. or temperatures. the meter’s calibration factors are determined. The correction factor is multiplied by the reading from the meter to offset the meter measurement. The density calibration is performed using two fluids — air and water. Every Micro Motion® meter is calibrated in a gravimetric calibration lab to determine the meter’s fundamental mass flow calibration factor.

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

proving is typically performed anytime the meter is subjected to changes in conditions which might cause a change in measurement accuracy. Also. When the sensor or transmitter is replaced. When a change in flow rate occurs. Anytime the accuracy of a meter is questioned by either party involved in the custody transfer. a zero offset would result in different meter factors for the forward and reverse directions. the level of proving can be decreased. The following list details all of the conditions under which a meter might need to be proved.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. (Refer to Appendix F. and on a regularly scheduled basis thereafter. Refer to Appendix E. the proving contract specifies how often proving must be performed. the meter should be reproved if the flow rate varies significantly from the normal operating flow rate. Proving the meter more frequently after the meter is initially installed will speed up the process of determining the required meter proving frequency. more provings might be required for a new installation. pressure. 4. It is generally recommended that new users who have little experience with Coriolis meters should prove their first meters at least monthly.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 2.) Because the objective of proving is to obtain the most accurate product accounting that is possible. In lieu of any test data. When the meter is rezeroed. if the change might cause the meter to exceed the accuracy limits set forth in the contract. provings should be performed to establish meter factors for each direction. 1. When there is a significant change in the system temperature. 9. Proving the meter over a range of flow rates might be necessary to determine acceptable flow rate tolerances. page 195. that would affect meter accuracy. for a discussion on meter zeroing. or anytime the sensor mounting conditions are changed. However. 3. 2. page 205. 6. If the meter is being used to measure bidirectional flow (forward and reverse flow). the meter calibration factor does not change between forward and reverse flow. to provide data on their particular applications. if the meter factor changes each time the meter is proved. and the proving frequency determined for these meters can be applied to all meters on similar service. When the meter is initially brought into service. page 195. the proving frequency can be reduced.) 8.5 How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? Typically. When the sensor is returned to service after having been removed from the process pipeline. or density. Refer to Appendix E. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 11 . these are not requirements. the real determinant should be the performance of the meter from one proving to the next. (Characterizing the meter’s zero can preclude having to prove when the meter is zeroed. However. Although. 7. 2. 5. One way to determine the frequency of proving is to collect proving data on an initial group of meters. If there is little or no change in meter factor between provings. then more frequent proving is appropriate. As confidence in the meter performance becomes established. Conversely. As required by the contract or proving schedule.

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

Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run ABC Company Butadiene XYZ Proving Co.0025 1.6196 3/8/98 400 – – – 65 No 73 90 .9950 0.05% • 0.6112 8/2/98 435 – – – 94 No 84 87 .General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 Figure 2-1.0075 1.10% 0. Calibration Factor K–Factor CMF300 123456789 RFT9739 987654321 667.6098 9/6/98 410 – – – 93 No 82 89 .9975 0.9925 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 . Location Fluid Proving Co.6175 4/5/98 395 – – – 75 No 76 88 .6111 Was meter rezeroed? 0.0000 0.0050 1.6126 7/5/98 445 – – – 95 No 82 89 . 3.08661 4 Mass Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.75 60 pulse/lb Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.15% Repeatability 0. Sample proving trend chart.584.614 6/7/98 450 – – – 92 No 80 90 .00% • • • • • • • Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 13 .6154 5/3/98 440 – – – 85 No 78 88 .

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

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

16 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

it can also be used for determining volumetric flow rate. These 3. page 239. Proving a Coriolis meter configured for volume measurement. 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. ™ This discussion on proving procedures is divided into three main topics: 1. it can be treated like any volumetric meter. page 67. Proving methods using other equipment listed above are discussed in detail in Section 8. generally 60°F and 14. many companies prefer to account for product on a standard volume basis. These procedures are generally applicable to master meters methods and tank proving methods.1 Meter Configured For Volume Measurement A Coriolis meter measures mass flow rate and density independently. (Eq. The field reference device can be stationary or portable. Proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. there are differences in the operation of the Coriolis meter that will require special consideration.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. For reasons of accounting tradition. Both conventional pipe provers and small volume provers are flow through volumetric proving device. as shown in Equation 3-2. 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 ). The measured volume is calculated as shown in Equation 3-1. Because the meter measures both mass and density. and 3.73 psia. This section provides a general overview of the procedures required to prove a Coriolis meter with a conventional pipe prover. Additional technical details about the meter’s volume measurement are presented in Appendix H. where q =Calculated volume flow · m =Measured mass flow ρ =Measured density Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 17 . 2. with some modification. 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. Although the methods for proving Coriolis meters and volumetric meters are very similar. Details of how these measurements are performed are presented in Appendices F and G.

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

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

can be used to record the proving data and perform the proving calculations. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. 8. 9. page 119. (Eq. 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). The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. 3. Perform proving calculations. Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. If the repeatability is acceptable. page 21. 7. 5. 6.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. 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. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. 11. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. Proving form A-1. Components have been added to the minimum system to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. 10. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 4.* 100 Pulses MIN 20 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Pressure and temperature at the prover is not representative of the conditions at the meter. 2. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. page 166 (Appendix A). Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. Equation 3-6 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. 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. Check for leaks. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. 3-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp MF v = -------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor where MFv = Meter factor. Maximum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-2. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. and must be diverted around the meter. 3-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Repeatability(%) = --------------------------------------------------------. illustrates the maximum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. provides additional details on proving calculations. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter.

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

A repeatability of less than 0. it will be necessary to prove the density measurement to obtain a density factor (DF). using the average number of pulses from the proving runs. 2.05% is commonly required. Determined from the Coriolis meter density measurement. Minimum Mass Proving Requirements Figure 3-3 illustrates the minimum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. It would be reasonable to prove the density measurement every time the Coriolis meter’s flow measurement is proved. In this situation. The Coriolis meter should be located close to the prover. The fluid density can be determined from any of the following methods: 1. This system can only be used under the following conditions: 1. Calculated from measured temperature and pressure. the prover volume must be converted to mass units to allow comparison to the mass measured by the meter. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the density meter. an accurate density determination at the prover must be made.2 Meter Configured For Mass Measurement When a Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved against a volumetric prover. If the fluid density varies while the meter is being proved. and this average density be used in the meter factor calculation. In order to convert the prover volume to mass. 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. 3. Determined from an in-line density meter located at the prover. page 166 (Appendix A).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. A single shutoff valve can be used to completely halt fluid flow through the sensor to allow zeroing. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. 2. Any error in the determination of the density will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. it is recommended that the average fluid density during the proving run be determined. The frequency of determining the density factor may be reduced if the density factor continually remains consistent from one proving to the next. The fluid density at the prover can be accurately determined from the pressure and temperature measurements. Actual field practice may vary from these recommendations based on the required accuracy levels. 3. Equation 3-7 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. This is particularly true of light hydrocarbons. The Ctlp and Cplp correction factors are determined from API MPMS look-up tables. Products that expand significantly when flow is halted will require two valves to block the meter in. 22 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . This method is limited to well characterized products of known composition. and the meter factor may be in error. it will be difficult to obtain acceptable repeatability. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the Coriolis meter. (Eq. If the repeatability is acceptable. If a density measurement device is used. due to fluctuations in product composition or process conditions. For many process fluids the actual flowing density (not the density at standard conditions) does not remain constant.

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

provides additional information on proving calculations. Before calculating the meter factor. can be used to record data. A look-up table or an equation is used to obtain the density of the fluid from the recorded pressure and temperature. not the accumulated pulses.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 6.025% of the repeatability specification. (Eq. 24 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . calculation is shown in Equation 3-8. 11. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. Based on a fluid with a density of 0. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. Therefore. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. (Eq. the repeatability should be based on the meter factor for the individual provings. The product density during the proving should vary by no more than 0. Proving form B-1. the pulse repeatability would not account for variations in product density. If the product density were to vary during the proving. For volumeto-volume proving. page 119. Perform proving calculations. the repeatability can be based on the number of pulses accumulated. the pulse repeatability may be unacceptable. 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). Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs.025% repeatability allowance for the meter and the rest of the proving system. This leaves only a 0. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. the product density must first be determined.8 g/cc. page 176 (Appendix B). 8. 9. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. However. Next. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are determined from Equation 3-9. 10. when performing a mass-tovolume proving. 7.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. This where ρp = fluid density under flowing conditions at the prover Section 9. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. for mass-to-volume proving. this level of density variation would take up 0. 3-8) MF MAX – MF MIN Repeatability(%) = ----------------------------------------.0002 g/cc. Then the meter factors for the individual proving runs are calculated as shown in Equation 3-9. 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. 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. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. and the repeatability is based on the maximum and minimum meter factors from the runs. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers.* 100 MF MIN Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. and shows the calculation steps.

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

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

Figure 3-5.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: 1.4. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. additional pressure and temperature measurements at the meter will be required to correct the density measurement to prover conditions. The disadvantage of using this system is that the density measurement is not located at the prover. 3. The advantages and disadvantages of series and parallel density proving systems are discussed in detail in Section 11. V2. requiring an average density to be determined. Proving Equipment Additional components of this mass metering/proving system. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard temperature • Optional Cplp determination from pressure measured at the prover. 2. 2. Figure 3-5. page 23. to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. page 28. to correct the measured fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlm determination from temperature measured at the meter. beyond those shown in Figure 3-3. which eliminates problems associated with sampling systems that are required with most density meters. to correct the fluid volume to standard temperature All of the components may not be required. 4. If the conditions at the prover and Coriolis meter are not similar. page 146. The bypass allows flow to be diverted around the meter to allow meter zeroing. An in-series density proving system can also be used. and V3. Maintenance is reduced because one less instrument is used in the system. and must be diverted around the meter. include: • A density proving system for the Coriolis meter • An optional density averager. The density at the prover cannot be determined from pressure and temperature measurements. The density of the fluid cannot be held constant while the meter is being proved. page 28. Add only those items that are needed for the particular application. are described below: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 27 . illustrates a density proving system that is installed parallel to the Coriolis meter. which includes valves V1. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. illustrates the equipment requirement for using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. 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. Components have been added to the minimum mass proving system. shown in Figure 3-3. to correct the fluid volume to standard pressure • Optional Ctlp determination from temperature measured at the prover. if the fluid density does not remain constant during the proving • An optional bypass loop. The Coriolis meter samples the entire fluid stream. The system includes an optional bypass loop to allow meter zeroing. • Optional Cplm determination from pressure measured at the meter. 3. beyond those described beginning on page 23. page 23.

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

The Coriolis meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. 2. then return the configuration to mass measurement for normal measurement. the density at the Coriolis meter must be converted to the prover conditions by using Equation 3-13. page 17). The Ctl and Cpl correction factors are determined from API MPMS lookup tables. 3-12) Density from Density Sample DF = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density Reading 1. page 176 (Appendix B). a separate density averager is not required. 2. are described below: 1. page 187. The disadvantages of this approach are: 1. 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. and form C-2. page 24). 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. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in proving a meter configured for mass measurement by using its pulse output to indicate volume.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 3 Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. The volume measurement obtained from the Coriolis meter will integrate any density variations. page 17. can be used to record data. The meter configuration parameters must be accessed. Prior to proving the meter. If this is not the case. is used to determine the density factor. provides a more detailed discussion of proving calculations. page 119. beyond those described in Section 3. and perhaps adjusted. The Coriolis meter’s density reading and density factor are used in this equation. Density proving form C-1.1. because the meter is continuously sampling the process fluid density. and the meter must be changed from mass to volume measurement during proving. and back to mass measurement after proving. except the density averager is entirely eliminated. Equation 3-11 can be used as long as the process conditions at the Coriolis meter and the prover are the same. page 186 (Appendix C). and shows the calculation steps. 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. Alternately. Proving form B-1. If the fluid density varies during the proving. Proving Equipment The equipment required is the same as shown in Figure 3-5. To ensure the product inventory is not compromised during the proving. 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. Before the proving is initiated. page 28. (Eq. Established volume proving procedures can be used (as described in Section 3. The advantages of this approach are: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 29 . the meter’s K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. and then changed back to the original value when it is returned to mass measurement. page 28). is used to convert the Coriolis meter density to prover conditions as shown in Equation 3-13. Section 9. (Eq. 2. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. the Coriolis meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined (Step 3. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. page 26. the repeatability is calculated by using the meter factor.1.

and form C-1. or Equation 3-7. 4. If the proving run is too short. Therefore. a transfer standard proving method can be employed. and is used as the reference to determine a meter factor for the test meter. 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Since there is no fixed prover volume limiting the proving time. repeatable proving results. is used to obtain the density factor (DF). Adjustments to this value or the inventory calculation may be required to ensure that the inventory measurement remains correct during the proving. page 22. the master meter’s meter factor has not been established under actual operating conditions. The master meter is brought out to the field. The calculation shown in Equation 3-14 can be added to the bottom of form A-1. The mass meter factor is then determined by multiplying the Coriolis meter’s density factor by the volume meter factor as shown in Equation 3-14. there may be difficulties in obtaining good repeatability. the repeatability calculation can be based on the number of pulses measured. then the Coriolis meter is proved against the turbine meter. to prove the Coriolis meter. The K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. and cannot be used to provide accurate. page 17. Master meter proving typically utilizes a “master” meter that has been calibrated in a laboratory setting. 5. the Coriolis meter will inherently perform fewer measurements. The fundamental measurement of a Coriolis meter is time based. page 20. If a larger prover is not available. such as a turbine meter. page 20. and depends on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. there is usually a drop in flow rate. resulting in poorer repeatability. page 29. In some applications the prover is too small for the Coriolis meter. (Eq. The volume meter factor is calculated from either Equation 3-6. The meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. as shown in Proving form A-1. It is important to distinguish transfer standard proving from master meter proving. Equation 3-5. If the prover prerun is too short. resulting in a more precise measurement.1. Master meter proving has uncertainty associated with the effect of the actual operating conditions on the master meter’s calibration. The meter is proved as a volume meter as described in Section 3. ® 3. page 166 (Appendix A). The transfer standard method uses a meter with a very fast response time. The longer the proving time. is used to obtain the volume meter factor (MFv). resulting in improved repeatability. page 186 (Appendix C).3 Transfer Standard Proving When using small volume provers or undersized conventional provers. due to a mismatch between the prover size and the Coriolis meter’s response time. This occurs most commonly when a small-volume prover is used to prove a relatively large Coriolis meter. the Coriolis meter pulse output may not represent the actual flow rate before the pulse accumulation begins. whichever is appropriate. This will result in an error in the meter factor that is determined. 3-14) MF m = MF v * DF Proving Calculations Because the meter is configured for volume measurement during the proving process. When the proving is initiated. 3.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving Communicator or the Micro Motion ProLink software program. the Coriolis meter and turbine meter measurements can be compared for one minute or more. This provides a longer time base for the Coriolis meter to perform measurements. The meter is returned to the mass measurement configuration once the proving is completed. The turbine meter is first proved against the prover. the more measurement samples that are made.

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

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

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

36 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

38 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

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

44 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

The 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.) For more information about the HART Communicator. Baud rates between 1200 baud and 38.2 or 2. PLC. If polling addresses are used. For more information. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. Using ProLink Software with Micro Motion Transmitters. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. the ProLink software program. (The older Rosemount communicator. or DCS) that supports the HART or Modbus protocol can be used to acquire the digital information directly from the transmitter. Using the RS-485 Output The RS-485 output signal is a ±5V square wave referenced to the transmitter ground. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22(485A). see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. Using the HART Communicator with Micro Motion Transmitters. RS-485 Multidrop Networks Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Modbus Protocol Under Modbus protocol. Micro Motion also has available a PC-based communications package. which will convert either Bell 202 or RS-485 communications to RS-232. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. and must not exceed 4000 feet (1220 meters) in length. and operates in the Microsoft® Windows® graphical environment. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 47 . For more information. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. HART Protocol Under HART protocol.2 kHz. with a baud rate limited to 1200 baud. the SMART FAMILY® Interface Model 268.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals DigitalInformation 6 Interface to Digital Information The transmitter supports two digital communications protocols: HART and Modbus®. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. The program requires a personal computer with an Intel® 386 or higher-version microprocessor. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. The ProLink program has additional features for performing meter diagnostics and logging data to ASCII data files for further analysis.4 kilobaud can be selected. requirements vary as follows. This handheld device is particularly convenient for field configuration and monitoring of the meter. see the following Micro Motion instruction manuals: • RFT9739 Transmitter-Specific (HART)Command Specification • Using Modbus Protocol with the Micro Motion ELITE Model RFT9739 Transmitter The handheld Rosemount HART Communicator Model 275 provides communication with the transmitter using the Bell 202 standard. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. Depending on the selected protocol. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 24 AWG (0. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. cannot be used with later-model RFT9739 transmitters. use terminals 26 (485B) and 27 (485A).

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

A schematic of the frequency output for the RFT9739 is shown in Figure 6-1a. The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 49 . the frequency output signal wiring must be 22 AWG (0. 6. with a 15V logic level square wave. Although most devices accept a 10. However. page 50. Because the output is internally powered. Signal input requirements vary from one device to the next. twisted-pair. some are limited to 5000 Hz or lower. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. The output is galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. For best results.1 amp maximum sinking capability. The output circuit is rated to 30 VDC. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. as shown in the schematic in Figure 6-1b. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter.2 kohm at the 15 volt logic level. terminal 15 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal 16 (RETURN) is the return line. with a 1000 ohm load limit. To provide sufficient pulse resolution. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). the RFT9739 can be modified to make it an “open collector” output. terminal CN2-D24 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal CN2-D26 (RETURN) is the return.1 to 10.000 Hz. A pull-up resistor provides an output impedance of 2. Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output The standard output is internally powered. the meter does not require additional power input. 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. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. page 50. The frequency output can be scaled from 0. This is different from many turbine and PD meters.3 mm2) or larger.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/PulseOutput 6 Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. shielded cable. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). the output is no longer 50/50 duty cycle. The pulse will be off (OV) for 0. which use an external power source from the prover counter. with 0. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. There is one frequency output available from the RFT9739.5 sec. In this case only the SV output can be used. A variety of proving counters can be used to accumulate pulses. and has out-of-range capability to 15. The square wave has a 50/50 duty cycle for frequencies greater than 1 Hz.000 Hz input signal. avoid using a counter that will not accommodate at least a 5000 Hz input.000 Hz. For frequencies less than 1 Hz. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. The PV analog output is disabled if the RFT9739 is configured for HART communication over the Bell 202 output and the RFT9739 has been assigned an address other than 0 for multidrop communication. unloaded. and be on (high voltage) for the remaining pulse duration. so an external DC power supply is not required. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA.3 Frequency/Pulse Output The frequency output from the meter is used primarily for batching and inventory measurement. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs.

VF+ 15V 2. Resistance is added to decrease input voltage to pulse counting device.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 open collector frequency schematic. Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output Figure 6-1a.2 kohm Freq+ Pulse out VF+ VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 Figure 6-1b. RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. 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. VF+ 15V 2.

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

• To view the K-factor using a HART Communicator. For RFT9712 transmitters and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3.000 Hz). open the Configure menu and choose Transmitter Outputs.* t K–Factor To provide the greatest amount of resolution. therefore. the meter should be scaled to produce the greatest number of pulses allowable per unit of mass that flows through the sensor. (Eq. select Config outputs. If field adjustment of the K-factor is required the following procedure should be used: 1. The maximum scalable frequency output is 10. the K-factor is calculated and stored in a register. Determine the maximum allowable frequency allowed by the pulse counting device (cannot exceed 10. which can be viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. 52 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . For example. Equation 6-8 can be rearranged to determine the appropriate frequency/flow rate settings for a desired K-factor setting. but it can be overranged to 15. • To view the K-factor using Prolink software. The time units conversion factor (t). as shown in Equation 6-9.0.* t Flow Rate Setting where t = time units conversion factor The time units conversion factor will vary from one application to the next.0 and higher. Use whatever time conversion is appropriate.* 60 (sec/min) Flow Rate (lb/min) If the K-factor needs to be changed. 6-9) Frequency Setting Flow Rate Setting = ----------------------------------------------------. and the flow rate setting is in flow units per minute. as shown in the following example: Frequency ( pulse/sec ) K–Factor = -------------------------------------------------------------.000 Hz. the frequency setting unit of measure is Hz (or pulses per second).000 Hz. (Eq. because it is capable of being scaled to a user-selected value. because there are 60 seconds per minute. Input frequency restriction for the proving counter must be kept in mind when scaling the frequency output from the meter. the K-factor must be calculated by hand. For RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. When there is no flow. The frequency output can be configured to produce a selected number of pulses for every unit of mass or volume that the meter measures.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. Determine the maximum operating flow rate. then select Frequency output. using Equation 6-8. 6-8) Frequency Setting K–Factor = ------------------------------------------------------. is 60. 2. go to the Detailed Setup menu. the Coriolis meter frequency output will be 0 Hz. new frequency and flow rate settings must also be determined.

The sampling of the ∆t measurement from the sensor pickoffs is dependent on the tube frequency. not pulse based. To avoid confusion. 6. Confusion often results among those who are accustomed to proving turbine and PD meters. changes in the density of the process fluid will also change the frequency of operation. round down the calculated K-factor to a convenient integer quantity. The typical meter operates at 80 Hz. 6. If desired. Whereas turbine meters and PD meters produce pulses as their primary measurements. larger sensors operate at lower frequencies. Table 6-1. Calculate the K-factor from Equation 6-8. a simulation test can be performed. Using the rounded K-factor and the maximum allowable frequency. Based on the frequency scaling. using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. Troubleshooting the Frequency/Pulse Output To verify proper operation of the meter’s frequency/pulse output. Enter the maximum allowable frequency and the calculated flow rate into the transmitter. This signal can be used to verify that the frequency/pulse output is interfacing properly with the prover counter. The frequency/pulse output is derived from the digital measurement performed by the microprocessor. the microprocessor determines how many pulses Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 53 . The higher the fluid density.” which indicates the value is a variable. The fluid that flows through the meter over a set time interval is measured and totaled. In addition. The total is stored in a register. the microprocessor The actual update time will vary from one meter to the next. the digital value is capable of updating as fast as every 0.4 Additional Flow Measurement Information In order to better understand the way Coriolis meters process and output the flow rate measurement. the frequency/pulse output from the meter can be set to any desired value between 0. Counters that are controlled by the microprocessor take four ∆t samples from the pickoffs during every tube cycle. but can be scaled by the user. The microprocessor and frequency/pulse circuitry operates in the following fashion. Coriolis meters produce a time difference (∆t) between the right and left pickoff detectors as their primary measurement. calculate a new flow rate setting using Equation 6-9 (which is a variation of Equation 6-8).025 seconds. 5.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 3. Every two tube cycles.000 Hz. Using a HART Communicator or the ProLink program. The update time of the ∆t measurement depends on the natural frequency of the tube vibration. there are several concepts that must be introduced: • Response time/damping • Low-flow cutoff • Meter zero reads in the total of eight ∆t samples.1 and 15. page 54. the lower the frequency of operation of the meter. presents typical operating frequencies for a variety of sensors. rather than a constant. because the number of pulses per unit of measured mass is not a constant value. In addition. the Coriolis meter K-factor could be more precisely referred to as a “pulse scaling factor. therefore. 4. Use the rounded K-factor value for subsequent proving calculations. the update time of the flow rate measurement also depends on the damping factor that has been set in the transmitter. calculates the average ∆t. because sensors operate at different frequencies — smaller sensors operate at higher 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. using the values determined from steps 1 and 2. then resets the counters.

and deviations are accounted for and adjusted for in the next time interval.4. Therefore. turbine meters and PD meters have significant inertia. Localized flow fluctuations and flow noise.2 uses second order filtering. a value of 0. which is used to convert the meter’s digital flow rate signal to a frequency output. Using a damping value of less than 0.8 g/cc 139 135 110 76 76 41 ρ=0. The microprocessor keeps track of the number of pulses output versus the total in the register. the graph in Figure 6-3 illustrates how damping affects the reaction of the Coriolis meter to changes in flow rate. The RFT9739 employs a selective digital software filter to accomplish this. The standard RFT9739 damping setting from the Micro Motion factory is 0. In the graph in Figure 6-3. The lower the tube frequency. the raw flow measurement signal from a Coriolis meter exhibits significant variation. it can lead to problems for some types of measurements. results in a slight lag between an update in the digital flow rate and an update in the frequency output. the response time characteristics of the meter can lead to problems with undersized in-line field provers.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Table 6-1. Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 ρ=0. are sensed by the meter and this information is reflected in the meter’s output signals. For an instantaneous change in flow rate.1 is generally not recommended because no filtering is applied. so their mechanical sensing elements tend to dampen out small scale fluctuations in flow.0012 g/cc 150 157 130 87 87 55 ρ=0. The flow sensor is extremely responsive to the dynamics of the fluid flowing through the vibrating tubes. Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy Although using damping is recommended for smoothing out the raw signal from the meter. the dotted line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. This value is a filter coefficient. and any value over 0. In contrast. the frequency output will lag the change in the digital flow rate by approximately 0.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 need to be output to correspond to the amount of fluid measured by the meter. resulting in output signals that have inherent mechanical averaging.8. damping is used to provide averaging of the signals over a longer time base before updating the digital values. The purpose of this damping is to filter out flow noise or the effects of rapid changes in flow rate. the frequency output of the meter is a reflection of the total flow measured by the meter. In particular. resulting from flow pulsations and fluid turbulence characteristics. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the input.1 incorporates first order filtering.1 54 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .1 seconds. The user-specified RFT9739 damping value can be varied from 0 to 1638. so internal microprocessor damping is available to average this signal over time and provide a more uniform output. A damping value of 0 will result in no filtering being applied. Basically. The signal processing circuitry. the solid line represents the actual flow rate. and is continually being adjusted to provide proper accounting of the total fluid flow through the meter. For a better understanding of these concepts. For process control applications. Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. without affecting overall measurement accuracy. the longer it will take for the digital values to be updated.

which depends on the transmitter damping factor and the sensor tube frequency.8 damping value would result in the determination of a meter factor with a value less than 1. using the 0. pulses from the meter begin to be accumulated by the prover counter.1 damping factor (dotted line) and a 0.8 damping factor. the launched object introduces additional pressure drop. Coriolis meter response during proving. In contrast. The danger of this scenario occurring depends primarily on two factors: 1. which is a factor of the prover volume and the fluid flow rate during the prerun.1 damping 0. The time between events 2 and 3 is the pulse accumulation period. The overall meter measurement is not in error. Duration of the prover prerun. pulse accumulation from the meter is halted. note the difference in flow indication between the meter with a 0.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 damping factor. At event 1. The applied meter factor is in error. 2. At event 2.8 damping Flow rate Prerun Pulse accumulation Event 2 Event 1 Start pulse count Launch piston Poppet valve closed Event 3 Stop pulse count Poppet valve open Time (sec) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 55 . the meter indication is being adjusted to an incorrect value.8 damping factor (dashed line). Event 1 is the launching of the prover ball or the prover piston. For the 0. For the example shown in Figure 6-3. Actual flow rate 0.000. a 0. At event 3. Figure 6-3. The meter response time. and the dashed line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. The time between events 1 and 2 is the prover prerun. which results in a reduction in the flow rate through the piping system. This meter factor would then be applied to the meter indication to correct its output. the meter responds quickly enough that its flow indication is the same as the actual flow rate throughout the entire pulse accumulation period. However. because the meter will be indicating a higher flow rate than the actual flow rate during the beginning of the pulse accumulation period.1 damping factor. In this example. by applying it. the meter is actually measuring correctly. Event 2 is the first measurement detector switch. but it takes the meter some time to make up for the discrepancy between the actual flow rate and the meter indication.8 damping factor results in an over-registration of counts by the prover counter. Event 3 is the second measurement detector.

The influence of any flow variations at the beginning and end of the proving run will be minimized by increasing the volume of the prover. If the flow rate changes at the end of the proving run. To prevent this low-level flow from being indicated or totalized. The damping factor should be set to 0. which eliminates the need for removing the lowflow cutoff. the same type of errors in the meter factor determination will result. and can be set independently. (Eq. The analog low-flow cutoff is unaffected by the digital low-flow cutoff. must be determined. To view the meter reading under no-flow conditions.1. Flow Rate Another consideration is flow rate variation while the meter is being proved. to limit meter factor errors. the flow rate during proving should not fluctuate by more than ±10% during the proving run. In order to use the factory standard damping factor of 0. The HART Communicator is most commonly used for this task. For an RFT9739 with software version 3. the baseline offset between the pickoffs.0 or higher.0.05% of the sensor’s maximum full-scale flow rate. a prerun time of approximately 4 seconds will be required. there will generally be a low-level flow indication from the meter. should be employed. 6-10) · m = K ( ∆t flow – ∆t zero ) Meter Accuracy Although meter response time issues can create difficulties in meter proving. The meter’s flow rate reading can be viewed with any compatible device that communicates digitally with the transmitter. However. If the flow rate falls below the low-flow cutoff value. a minimal amount of damping is recommended to average out some of the flow-induced noise. The standard flow cutoff setting is 0.8. page 195.8 should not be used when proving meters with in-line provers. or an RFT9739 transmitter with software version lower than 3. the frequency output will go to 0 Hz. the low-flow cutoff must be set to zero when using an RFT9712 transmitter. under non-flowing conditions. and details on assessing the need for rezeroing the meter. to provide fast response time. However. This process is called “zeroing” the meter. even when there is no flow going through the sensor. and the internal digital totalizers will stop counting. If the flow rate drops below the low-flow cutoff value. the meter’s flow rate indication will go to zero. higher or lower values can be programmed into the transmitter as needed. a prerun time of 1 second would be more conservative. due to process variations.1 is the flow rate output from the meter will have a greater degree of variation. A damping factor larger than 0. it should be kept in mind that the accuracy of the meter is unaffected by changes in damping factor. The key is that the meter should respond as quickly as possible to variations in flow rate. The zero value (∆tzero) that is determined is subtracted by the transmitter from all subsequent time difference (∆tflow) measurements. The remaining ∆t represents the “true” mass flow rate. The only problem associated with using a low damping value of 0. Using a larger damping factor will require a longer prerun time. Therefore. a low-flow cutoff For the meter zeroing procedure.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Duration of the Prover Prerun The duration of the prerun should be no less than 0. Low-Flow Cutoff Due to inherent variability in the signals from the pickoff detectors. which may make it difficult to read a stable flow rate from the meter. 56 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Refer to Equation 6-10 for the mathematical implementation of the meter zero. a “live zero” register can be viewed. The low-flow cutoff value for frequency/pulse output is the same as the digital low-flow cutoff value.67 seconds. refer to Appendix E. Meter Zero As part of the normal startup procedure for a Coriolis meter.

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

58 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

. . . . . . . . . . Pressure Measurement Device . . . . . .4 7. . . . . . Temperature Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 7. . . . . . . . . . . .6 7. . . .7 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pulse Counting Device . . . . . . . . . 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 64 65 65 7.3 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Averaging Device. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Proving Device . Frequency Totalizers . . . . . . . . . . . . Dual-Channel Proving Counters. . Single-Channel Proving Counters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Density Measurement Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7. . . . . . . . . . .2 Proving Computer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

page 49. Cps. inputs are provided for two meters.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pulse Counting Device • The ability to sample and average temperature and pressure to compute the Cts. Single-Channel Proving Counters Single-channel proving counters are used with conventional provers. After a prescribed amount of time the button is pushed again and the counter stops accumulating pulses from the meters. Details on the characteristics of this output signal are presented in Section 6.3. They will display the total number of pulses accumulated from the meter during a proving run. however. More commonly. The types of devices commonly available for accomplishing this task are described below. These devices will use the meter’s K-factor to compute and display the mass or volume measured by the meter. They will accept a 62 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . they are used for master meter proving where the master meter and meter to be proved are both connected to the counter. Dual-Channel Proving Counters Dual-channel proving counters operate in the same manner as single channel proving counters. and performing a pulse interpolation calculation. One of the key components in a manual proving system is the pulse counting device. The voltage level from the proving detector switches are used to initiate the accumulation of pulses from the meter. Ctl and Cpl correction factors • The ability to accept a 10. single frequency input from a meter. as in cases where pay-and-check meters are used.2 Pulse Counting Device The majority of proving applications involve acquiring all of the measurement data manually and performing hand calculations. the computer must be capable of performing dual-chronometry time measurement. which is used to accumulate pulses from the meter during the proving run. 7. They can be used to prove two meters simultaneously. Frequency Totalizers Frequency totalizers that have computational capability and a display.000 Hz frequency input signal • If a small volume prover is being used. The pulse counting device must be capable of accepting the frequency output signal from the transmitter. This feature can also be applied to conventional provers if desired. These devices are commonly used for tank proving applications. a button is pushed and pulses are accumulated from both meters simultaneously. To initiate a proving.

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

0001 g/cc. accurate to ±0.0005 g/cc. All of the other methods require taking a fluid sample and determining the density of the sample. The following methods are available to determine the process fluid density: • Calculation of density from pressure and temperature measurements. which will be used specifically for density measurement. this device will generally require a slipstream to be pulled from the process pipeline. it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. or some other sampling method. and can be monitored while the meter is being proved. When performing on-line density measurements. However. ±0. if the sample contains light-ends and is not properly sealed. and a volumetric prover is used.0005 g/cc for stainless steel. Of the methods described above. accurate to ±0.5 Density Measurement Device If the meter is configured for mass measurement. Accuracy depends on instrument accuracy and equation accuracy. and the on-line density determination devices are the most practical. • On-line density from the Coriolis meter. 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.0001 g/cc.0001 g/cc for NiSpanC. (A Coriolis meter mounted at the prover. • Pycnometer. The hydrometer technique requires a fluid sample to be taken from the process pipeline. or some other sampling method. accurate to ±0. • Hydrometer. The on-line density devices have the advantages of providing a continuous output signal that represents the actual flowing density. which raises concerns about proper sampling technique. an on-line density meter made of NiSpanC. the light-ends will escape to the atmosphere and cause a deviation in the sample density from the true product density. can be used. a means is required for determining the density of the product at the prover. For the highest precision. It is difficult to obtain samples that will represent the actual fluid density during the proving runs.) 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. accurate to ±0. the calculation method for well defined products. This may create errors in the density determination. • Sample and laboratory density determination. accurate to ±0. or additional temperature and pressure corrections will be required. Hydrometers generally do not have sufficient accuracy to be used for mass to volume proving applications. • On-line density from a separate density meter mounted at the prover. In addition it may be difficult to maintain the sample at the same temperature and pressure as the process fluid in the pipeline.001 g/cc. The device being used for determining density should have an accuracy of at least ±0. Also.0005 g/cc. with an accuracy of ±0. correction factors would then be required to correct the density back to the process conditions. Because the product volume will change with changing temperature and pressure.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7. 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. 64 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . can be used. Proper sampling practices are vital to ensure the sample is representative of the process fluid.0001 g/cc.

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

66 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

. 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 . . . . . . . . 99 Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Repeatability versus number of passes per run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outlet piping design for filling tank provers . . . Gravimetric proving with tanker truck . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter Coriolis master meter proving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tank proving flow rate ramp-up/ramp-down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small volume prover. Double-chronometry pulse interpolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conventional pipe prover . . . . . . .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. . . . . . . . . . . . 103 70 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric proving against a storage tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Typical sensor operating frequencies. . . . . Average meter factors for multiple proving runs . . . . . . . . . . .

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

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

085 0. but being used to measure a fluid with significantly different density than the weights.0009 1.4 1.0006 1.060 0. 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. when proving the Coriolis meter. Correction % 0.6 1.8 0.2 1. (Eq. Equation 8-2 is used to determine buoyancy. Fb 1. and the object displacing the air is either (1) the metal weight.0005 1. Fluid Density g/cc 2.8 1.0012 1. The difference is important when a product of different density is weighed.119 0. and Table 8-2 presents calculated buoyancy correction values for a range of fluid densities at sea level. ρ fluid Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 73 .0011 1. Essentially. a buoyancy correction factor (Fb) is applied to the scale’s reading. The 100 lbs of water is subject to a much larger upward buoyant force than the 100 lb weight.105 0. the process fluid. and the buoyant force is inherently calibrated out.0019 1. Therefore.0005 1.7 0. For gravimetric proving.185 0.0 1. page 181 (Appendix B).9 0.9 1. the scale reading is adjusted to match the weight of the certified weights.1 1.052 0. and the weights. can be used for recording data and performing the gravimetric proving calculations. no correction would be required.094 0. resulting in the scale registering a lower reading for the water than its actual mass.0007 1.0006 1.157 0.056 0.048 0.3 1.6 0. (Eq.065 0. Buoyancy correction factors.071 0.045 0. for determining the quantity of fluid measured by the meter. the fluid being displaced is air. Return line must be isolated so as not to affect the scale reading The only instrumentation required is a display or pulse counting device.0 0.0023 at sea level.0007 1. the buoyancy correction is a calculation that employs the ratios of the densities of air.Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving 8 • Weigh scale • Weigh tank • Valving to divert flow and start and stop batches • Fluid return line and pump (optional). A 100 lb weight displaces a much smaller volume than 100 lbs of water. Buoyancy Correction Buoyancy correction is necessary to account for the scale being calibrated with metal weights.7 1. The displacement of fluid results in the fluid exerting an upward buoyant force on the object.226 Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor for gravimetric proving is determined from Equation 8-1. The scale is calibrated with the metal weights. when calibrating the scale. 8-2) ρ air 1 – ---------------- ρ weight Fb = ------------------------------ρ air 1 – -----------. Table 8-2. 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.5 Note: All values Buoyancy Correction Factor. To compensate for this effect.5 1.0005 1.135 0. or (2) the process fluid being measured.0009 1.0008 1. 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-6.0016 1.0014 1. If the scale were only being used to measure items of the same density as the metal weight.072 0.

74 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical gravimetric prover. as indicated in Table 8-1. This component will generally have less than ±0.025% or better accuracy should be the target. page 125. which are a fundamental measurement standard.5. This will have a noticeable impact in custody transfer applications. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation. If truck scales are used.01% over the entire calibration range. page 73. 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.* 100 Batch Size This component is minimized by increasing the size of the test batch.1% and greater.01% ) + ( ± 0. and can result in measurement errors of 0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving From Table 8-2. Eprover res = The scale uncertainty due to resolution is determined from the following equation: Scale Resolution E prover res = -----------------------------------------------. Using Equation 8-3. The uncertainty can be improved by increasing the batch size or improving the scale resolution. A batch size large enough to result in ±0. Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty Gravimetric provers are a primary standard because. over the range of weight used for calibration.01% ) + ( ± 0. Eprover cal = The uncertainty from the scale calibration is determined from the measured or accepted deviation between the scale reading and the weights.0 g/cc. Scale Resolution Batch Size = -----------------------------------------------0. it can be seen that this factor is significant for products of densities less than 1. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. the total uncertainty can then be determined as follows: E = ( ± 0. The following calculation can be used to determine the appropriate batch size. page 71.01%. (Eq. they are calibrated against certified weights.025% ) + ( ± 0. they may not have sufficient resolution to warrant the additional calculations required to correct for buoyancy. The scale should agree with the calibration weights to within ±0.01% ) 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01% uncertainty. Total error is calculated using Equation 8-3.00025 Ebuoy = The uncertainty due to the buoyancy correction will depend on the accuracy of the densities used to determine the buoyancy correction factor.030% The scale resolution is the predominant influence on the calculated uncertainty.

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

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

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

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

If a vapor recovery system is used. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-5. If the meter is configured for volumetric measurement. Flow Sensor Transmitter Storage tank • Volatile products can evaporate during the transfer process. • What should be done with the fluid once it is in the tank? Should it be disposed of. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. leveling equipment. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 79 . 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.1. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. which are used to measure products under pressure. A prover tank leveling system is generally required to ensure consistent readings from the site gauge used in determining the prover volume. site gauge. the product temperature in the vessel must be measured to correct the volume of the vessel for thermal expansion. The site gauge meniscus should always be read from the same angle to ensure consistency in the measurement. Sealed volumetric provers. page 17. In addition. can the product being removed from the system be accounted for? • Volatile products escaping to the atmosphere raise environmental issues. prior to reading the following details about volumetric tank provers.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Figure 8-5. 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. thermowell. which can lead to measurement errors. also require pressure measurement to correct the prover volume for pressure expansion. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by the meter • Precision thermometer or RTD • Pressure gauge or transducer (optional. 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. Volumetric proving against a storage tank. page 22.2. Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for volumetric tank proving: • Volumetric tank. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. the density of the fluid in the prover will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid in the prover and allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. and Section 3.

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

0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. page 63.0125% ) + ( ± 0.0001 g/cc can be obtained. and should not exceed ±0.4 Tank Provers. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. Using the values presented above.073%. (Eq. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. An uncertainty of ±0.02% ) + ( ± 0. 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.02%.01% ) + ( ± 0.01%. 8-8) Density Uncertainty (g/cc) E density (%) = ± ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 81 .03% (NIST Handbook 105-3).005%.03% ) + ( ± 0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. (Eq. At best. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. Only the temperature correction is used in the analysis shown below.04% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. * 100 Process Fluid Density (g/cc) where Esteel = Two steel correction factors may need to be applied: (1) Ctsp. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. an uncertainty of ±0.4. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-7) using Equation 8-8.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. 8-7) E = ( Ecal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E density ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.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. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to the resolution of the graduations of the site gauge on the prover neck should not exceed ±0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.8 g/cc.3 and 7. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the volumetric tank prover should be within ±0. and (2) Cpsp. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis.

which must be considered when performing a volumetric tank proving. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. (Eq. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. From Equation 8-6.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. All of the terms in Equation 8-9 are the same as those in Equation 8-7. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions might be required. as shown in Equation 8-6. For this analysis.03% ) + ( ± 0. page 81. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors.02% ) + ( ± 0. page 80.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-9.01% ) + ( ± 0. which introduces a degree of error.039% Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. 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. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11.01%. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. bulging. these factors may not even be applied. page 80. or the tables could be misapplied. or internal deposits • Site gauge resolution versus tank volume • Batch duration versus ramp-up/ramp-down times • Consistent batch size from one test to the next • Evaporation of process fluid during the test run 82 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Using the values presented above. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. However. the errors can be significant. If the liquid correction factors are used. are: • Ensuring the tank volume is not changed by dents. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.

the interior of the tank should be inspected. and is helpful in reducing evaporation. As stated previously. Batch Size Recommendation For volumetric tank provers. and cannot be varied as it can with a gravimetric prover. As stated previously. If one of the meters exhibits Batch Duration Versus RampUp/Ramp-Down Times This concern is the same as for gravimetric proving (page 76). this concern is relevant to any tank proving system (page 76). Any foreign material. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 83 . No fewer than three test batches should be performed. 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. Reinforcing bands are applied to the exterior of the tank. The uncertainty due to site gauge resolution should be no greater than ±0. Number of Test Batches It is preferable to perform five or more proving runs. the tank should be sized to allow a batch of no less than 1 minute in duration. If both meters yield the same type of performance. and the bottom is usually concave. Repeatability As stated previously. rust. The prover’s restricted neck minimizes the surface area of the air/fluid interface. Proper leveling of the tank and consistency in reading the meniscus are important considerations. it will need to have a new waterdraw performed. Additional vapor reduction means may be needed. Proving tanks are generally constructed to minimize tank deformation.02%. and cleaned with an appropriate solvent if necessary. and the piping used to fill the proving tank must consistently contain the same amount of fluid for every proving run. The piping must be leak free. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. If the tank becomes dented or deformed. or deposits that build up on the interior of the prover will affect the measured volume. The volume of the prover should be verified routinely to ensure measurement errors are not being introduced into the proving results. 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. Evaporation of Process Fluid During the Test Run Care must be exercised to ensure the process fluid does not evaporate from the system. the tank should have a resolution uncertainty of ±0. to ensure the proving results are representative of the meter’s performance under normal operating conditions. the size of the batch is determined by the size of the tank. it is important that the ramp-up and ramp-down intervals are relatively short in relation to the batch duration.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. Consistent Batch Size Again.025%). In addition.05% (±0.02% or less. the problem generally lies with the prover. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. It is important to ensure the same amount of product that goes through the meter ends up in the proving tank. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. Excessive evaporation could result in measurement errors.

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

1. thermowell. Conventional pipe prover. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. the product temperature in the prover must be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. and Section 3. In addition. • Conventional pipe prover.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Figure 8-6. 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 8-10.2. 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. page 86. prior to reading the following details about conventional pipe provers. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow • The following additional instrumentation is required: • Pulse counting device. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. page 17. The equations used are the same as those used for volumetric tank provers. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. 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. page 22. A pressure measurement is also required for correcting for the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the 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. Flow Connection valves Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 85 .

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-1.5. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. which provides a common base for comparison. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. For products such as LPG and NGL. Ctlm . Proving form A-1. 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 crude oil. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. page 166 (see Appendix A). it may be helpful to refer to Section 9. 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 conventional pipe prover. can be used for recording data and performing the calculations for conventional pipe provers.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover (Eq. Conventional Pipe Proving Uncertainty The volume of the prover loop is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures.2°F and 5 psig is required. however.Cplp . the pipe prover is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. there is no specific recommendation available. page 176 (Appendix B). these factors are not required. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid. 86 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Therefore.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . (Eq. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. can be used for recording data and performing the calculations for conventional pipe provers. page 125. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. 8-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MFv = ---------------------------------------------.

or ±0. an uncertainty of ±0.01%. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.005%. 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. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 87 .0001 g/cc can be obtained. At best.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover ball) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. and should not exceed ±0.8 g/cc.01% ) + ( ± 0.02% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. An uncertainty of ±0.03% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp.0125% ) + 2* ( ± 0. beginning on page 63. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.000 pulses.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). Eprover cal = Eprover res = Ecounter res= Edensity = Esteel = Using the values presented above.2 Conventional Pipe Provers. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.3 and 7. page 81.01%. Per API MPMS 4.041% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.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 8-12.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. (Eq.02% of the volume between the detectors. and (2) Cpsp.4.01% ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10.074%. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-12) using Equation 88.

it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0.03% ) + ( ± 0. or the tables could be misapplied. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. the errors can be significant. 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.01% ) + ( ± 0. However. (Eq. If the liquid correction factors are used. From Equation 8-11. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-11. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. page 86. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. these factors may not even be applied. page 86.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values.041% 88 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . except the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. For this analysis.01%. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. page 87.02% ) + ( ± 0. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.01% ) + ( ± 0.8 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. which introduces a degree of error. 8-13) E = ( E cal ref ) 2 + ( E prover cal ) 2 + ( E prover res ) 2 + ( E counter res ) 2 + ( E liquid ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 A density measurement is not needed for this case. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. Using the values presented above.01% ) + 2* ( ±0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. All of the terms in Equation 8-13 are the same as those in Equation 8-12.

The problem is that launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop.000 pulses from the meter. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter.4. Leakage past the ball can be prevented by making sure the ball is properly filled to slightly exceed the internal diameter of the prover. Failure of a detector switch is generally easy to diagnose. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. In bi-directional provers. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate. because there will usually be severe measurement errors. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume.000 pulses. the meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. Consequently. 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.3 (see K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the ball and accumulating pulses from the meter. which must be considered when using a conventional pipe prover are: • Leakage past the prover ball and/or valves • Proper functioning and alignment of the detector switches • Accumulating enough pulses to minimize errors in pulse counting • Prover prerun is long enough to allow frequency output from the meter to settle to the correct flow rate after the ball is launched • Stabilization of the prover temperature • Erosion or corrosion of the prover that would change the prover volume often replaced without performing a new waterdraw. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. Leakage Past the Prover Ball or Valves Any leakage past the prover ball or through the prover diversion valves will result in measurement errors. if there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. 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. Unidirectional provers require a new waterdraw any time the detectors are removed. page 52). (See Section 6. The ball should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure there is no severe scratching or scoring of the prover ball. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. From a technical perspective. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. If a detector switch is replaced. The smallest Proper Functioning of Detector Switches The detector switches must always be triggered by the prover ball at the same location to ensure consistent volume indication. The switches can become worn or damaged. To minimize such errors. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. detector switches are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 89 . and the prover must be of suitable volume to allow a proving run that is long enough. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. as discussed in Section 6. page 53. by employing a double block and bleed valve for diverting fluid from the main pipeline into the prover. For enough pulses to be accumulated. a waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a prover detector switch. the proving results will be in error.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. the proving run should last long enough to accumulate at least 10.8. 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.01%. Most provers are equipped with some means for checking valving leaks.

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

the poppet valve.2 seconds. them proved again with the damping factor of 0. page 92. The meter should be proved first with the damping factor of 0. because the flow rate indication from the meter varies significantly. If poor repeatability is demonstrated. Generally. Although the damping factor will have no affect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. A metal rod. The wide flow range allows one SVP to be used for calibrating multiple meters with significantly different flow ratings. is attached to the piston. a simple test can be performed. pulses from the meter being calibrated are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 91 .8. which generally results in provings taking less time. Therefore. If there is no change in the meter factor between the two different damping value.67 seconds. and a damping factor of 0.2 second prerun is too short for the Coriolis meter to properly respond to a change in flow rate caused by launching the prover displacer.8 is preferred. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. When the prover is in the standby mode or not being operated. which has an optical “flag” mounted on it. When the flag triggers the first measurement switch. a conventional pipe prover is large enough that the prerun will be 4 seconds long. However. Its small size makes the SVP particularly suitable for portable installations. creating a solid surface. sweeping out a volume of fluid. However. An SVP is essentially the same as a pipe prover. and the optical detectors.8 can be used. special precautions must be taken to ensure the validity of the proving results when using an SVP. which requires a proving duration of at least 0. A diagram of a typical SVP. The flowing fluid pushes the piston downstream through the cylinder. in this case a Brooks Compact Prover. and the prover prerun time is not known. The volume of an SVP is on the order of 10 to 20 times smaller than a conventional pipe prover used for comparable service. Compact Prover is a trademarked name for the small volume prover manufactured by Brooks Instruments. The seals around the piston prevent leakage of fluid around the piston as it moves down the cylinder.000 pulses from the meter. and additional timing computations are required to minimize resolution problems associated with accumulating fewer than 10. and eliminates the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short.1. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. Using the lowest damping factor of 0. except it has a significantly smaller volume. the larger damping value is acceptable. Key components are the prover cylinder and piston. 8. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different factor.1 is usually quite conservative. the “flag” triggers optical measurement switches.4 Small Volume Prover The terms small volume prover and Compact Prover™ are often used interchangeably.1. As the piston sweeps through the cylinder volume.8. The primary advantages of a small volume prover (SVP) are its small size and wide flow rate rangeability of 1000:1. If a damping value of 0. the poppet valve is closed pneumatically and seals against the face of the piston. The damping factor should not be set any higher than 0. and reduces the time required for the prover displacer to traverse the prover volume. it might be necessary to use a smaller damping factor. the poppet valve is open and fluid flows freely through the piston assembly. Because a 0. When a proving pass is initiated. many individuals do not like to use a low damping factor. is presented in Figure 8-7. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 The factory default setting is a 0. prerun times at the maximum rated flow of the prover can be as short as 0.8 damping factor.

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

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

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. prior to reading the following details about small volume provers. A printer is required to produce the report. and Section 3. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. (Eq. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Proving electronics.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.000 Hz) for timing measurements. page 17. 94 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The equations used are the same as those used for conventional pipe and volumetric tank provers.1. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. consisting of (1) a pulse counting device. 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. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. Proving form B-2. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. In addition. 8-16) N interpolated M meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. page 177 (Appendix B). The meter mass is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. and the duration of the individual proving passes. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor is determined from Equation 8-15.2. which contains all of the required proving information. The requirements for density averaging will obviously depend on the stability of the process fluid density. as shown in Equation 8-16. page 22. 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. instead of the total meter pulses. (2) a high-resolution crystal oscillator (>100. The product temperature in the prover must also be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. not the individual proving passes. (Eq. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. thermowell.

8-17) BPV * C tsp * C psp Ctlp * Cplp MF v = --------------------------------------------. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9. A printer is required to produce the report. There are two differences between this calculation and the one used for conventional pipe provers: 1. For products such as crude oil. not the individual proving passes. page 167 (see Appendix A). (Eq. however. the SVP is a tertiary reference to a fundamental measure. which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. and Cplm) correct the actual measured volumes to standard conditions. as shown in Equation 8-18. page 125. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Pulse Output Configured for Volume The volume meter factor is determined from Equation 8-17. Proving form A-2. For products such as LPG and NGL. which provides a common base for comparison. Ctlm . it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report. there is no specific recommendation available. these factors are not required. (Eq.* ----------------------------Q meter C tlm * Cplm where Qmeter= Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 95 . This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are essentially the same depend on the characteristics of the fluid.2°F and 5 psig is required. which contains all of the required proving information. instead of the total meter pulses. which is the standard proving equation used for turbine and PD meters. The calculation of the correction factor Ctsp includes a term to take into account the thermal expansion of the steel rod that holds the optical prover detectors. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical SVP. 8-18) N interpolated Q meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2.5. Cplp . Therefore. Small Volume Prover Uncertainty The volume of the prover cylinder is determined against NIST volumetric fieldstandard test measures. The meter volume is determined from the interpolated meter pulses.

3 and 7.038% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. and (2) Cpsp. Ecounter res = The uncertainty due to the pulse counter and pulse interpolation calculations should not exceed ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.3 Small Volume Provers. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP.03% ) + ( ± 0. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. 96 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . page 81.01%. an uncertainty of ±0. 8-19) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( Eprover res ) + ( Ecounter res ) + ( Edensity ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 This calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers.4 on page 63. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-19) using Equation 88.072%.0001 g/cc can be obtained.005%.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. Esteel Using the values presented above. the overall proving uncertainty for a small volume prover is: E = ( ± 0.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. However. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.0125% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover piston) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. 105-3).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. An uncertainty of ±0.03% (NIST Handbook. (Eq.01% of the volume between the detectors. Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.01% Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. = Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp.8 g/cc. and should not exceed ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. At best.

which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. For this analysis.03% ) + ( ± 0. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-17. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. the pass-to-pass proving results obtained from a small volume prover are typically not as repeatable. 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. this calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 97 . which will introduces a degree of error. (Eq. This is due to the smaller prover volume. However.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. page 95. A density measurement is not needed for this case. If the meter and prover are located close to one another. page 95. the errors can be significant. or the tables could be misapplied. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values.01% ) + ( ± 0. All of the terms in Equation 8-20 are the same as those in Equation 8-19. Using the values presented above the overall proving uncertainty for an SVP is: E = ( ± 0. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.01% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. which inherently magnifies the effect of any deviations in the prover performance or meter performance during the proving pass.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. page 96. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP.01%. From Equation 8-17. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. these factors may not even be applied. However. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. If the liquid correction factors are used.037% Although the uncertainty calculated for a small volume prover is less than for a conventional pipe prover. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0.

The typical optical detector switch is extremely precise.01% resolution uncertainty. 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. 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.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Precautions Key items that impact the accuracy of the proving. the prime sources of uncertainty are the reference period of the clock and the time period used to accumulate pulses from the meter. and applying sufficient actuator pressure. Accumulating Enough Pulses From the uncertainty analysis performed in the previous section. For the Brooks Compact Prover. so more frequent inspection for leaks is warranted. the piston seals are suspect. which provides a means for checking whether any flow is bypassing the prover. the uncertainty due to the pulse resolution should be less than ±0. If the rod that holds the measurement detectors moves more than the amount prescribed by the manufacturer. It may be desirable to coat the walls of the proving cylinder with an appropriate epoxy-based compound or baked-on phenolic. Because pulse interpolation is used. the proving repeatability will be 98 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Therefore.01%.025 seconds to obtain ±0.000 times greater than the reference period of the clock in order to provide sufficient accuracy. which must be considered when using a small volume prover. Wear of the seals will be greater with process fluids that have poor lubricating qualities. Any leakage past the prover seals will result in measurement errors. A waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a detector switch. If a detector switch is replaced. the clock frequency is 800.000 Hz. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. The time period for pulse accumulation must be at least 20. The prover piston seals can be checked for leaks by blocking the prover in. Any misalignment between switches will result in measurement errors. the repeatability of the proving will be impacted by the number of pulses accumulated from the meter. which has a very low coefficient of thermal expansion. to improve lubricity. The actual proving time is at least 10 times greater than this value. to minimize variations in the flag position relative to the detector switches.000. the time period required for pulse accumulation is only 0. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. and probably require replacement. If the proving results seem inconsistent with previous results. Even though pulse interpolation is used. launching the prover piston. If the number of pulses accumulated during a proving run is less than 1.25 microseconds. which corresponds to a period of 1. the switches should be checked to make sure they have not become loose and shifted their position. The flag is commonly mounted on a rod made of a steel.

However. the proving results will be in error. within the frequency constraints of the proving counter. but will make the meter less repeatable. The internal measurement sampling of the Coriolis meter is based on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. the transmitter should be configured to produce the maximum number of pulses possible. The shorter the time period for launching the piston. more passes per run are required.1. Typical sensor operating frequencies. This in turn causes the voltage signals from the pickoffs to become “noisy”. This generates random vibration which is transmitted to the sensor flow tube and pickoff detectors. piston reaches the first detector switch and the accumulation of pulses from the meter begins. If the plenum pressure is set too high.4. Therefore. This does not affect the overall accuracy of the meter measurement.0012 g/cc ρ = 0. page 103. Table 8-3 shows typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the piston and accumulating pulses from the meter. launching the piston can create significant mechanical shock. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. Prover Plenum Pressure Some small volume provers use pressure to assist in closing the poppet valve to launch the prover piston. The problem is that launching the prover piston causes the flow rate to change.8. To further minimize pulse resolution errors. 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. when proving times are less than 5 seconds. For an SVP. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. A key point to consider is that the Coriolis meter measurement is time based. Additional information is presented under Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. 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. and additional passes are required to externally accumulate more data from the Coriolis meter. The meter takes four internal ∆t samples for each vibration period. page 100. a flow tube that vibrates at 80 Hz will result in 320 internal samples being taken per second. and Damping Factor Recommendations. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate.67 seconds in duration. page 53. a lower damping factor will be required.8 g/cc 159 139 157 135 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 (Hz) ρ = 0. This is because the number of internal Coriolis meter measurements is limited for short pass times. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. Since small volume provers have such short pass times. the less repeatable the meter measurement becomes. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 somewhat worse. which will transmit down the pipeline to the meter. The more internal measurement samples made by the meter. Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor/Tube Frequency ρ = 0. Therefore. 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. a prerun time of 4 seconds or longer is not very common.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 99 . The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. (See Section 6. the better the proving repeatability will be.

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

but can be a single proving pass. However. lists maximum flow rates for Brooks Compact Provers to provide compatibility to MMI Coriolis meters.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Thus.17 seconds. Appendix B. five proving round trips. Table 8-4.05%.3 Small Volume Provers. but is also used to provide confidence in the proving results. When using Equations 8-21 and 8-22 for sizing small volume provers for use with Coriolis meters. for determining the maximum flow rate (given the SVP size): (Eq. The repeatability specification is used as the determinant in ensuring a sufficient number of proving runs are performed to provide the correct meter factor. there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. Prover Description 8" 12" Midi 12" Std 18" 24" 34" 40" Volume. Repeatability is used as an indication of whether the meter and proving system are operating properly. which repeat within 0. By using a larger prover. Method 3 in Appendix B. flowmeters will generally exhibit unacceptable repeatability when proved with small volume provers using five individual proving trips. due to the smaller quantity of liquid typically measured with an SVP. a proving run is generally a group of passes averaged together. the maximum recommended flow rate for a Brooks Compact prover is approximately four times less than the prover specification. Number of Proving Passes/Runs Generally. To clarify terminology used in this discussion: a proving pass is equal to one complete trip of the prover piston. gpm (m³/h) 150 (35) 300 (70) 450 (105) 900 (210) 1940 (450) 3640 (850) 5075 (1150) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 101 . gal (liters) 5 (20) 10 (40) 15 (60) 30 (120) 65 (250) 100 (400) 170 (650) Maximum flow rate. Table 8-4. Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters. 8-22) Prover Volume (units) ≥ 0. It is recommended to use the largest size Compact Prover available when proving Coriolis meters. page 101. The prerun duration at the maximum flow rating of the Compact Prover is on the order of 0. is most commonly used. Special methods for defining the required number of proving runs for SVPs have been developed and are presented in API MPMS 4. are used to prove a meter with a conventional prover. 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.

0006 Average meter factor 1. are performed. Coriolis Meter Number of Passes The question that remains is.0004 1. For turbine and PD meters 5 runs of 3 passes each is most commonly used. A series of runs. Meter factors are then determined for each run. The same procedure was used for the other sets of data producing: • • • • • 20 runs of 5 passes. At the far left of the graph is the data for one pass per run. The average of all of the runs then becomes the meter factor to be used for inventory calculation.9998 0. and then determine an average meter factor for the run. page 124. 1. 6 runs of 15 passes. Each data point is the average meter factor for the three passes. It can be seen that. Average meter factors for multiple proving runs. The meter factor repeatability between the runs is summarized in Table 8-5 (which presents the repeatability results calculated from the difference between the maximum and minimum meter factors. Usually. These data points represent the individual meter factors for each of the 100 prover passes. Increasing the number of passes per run results in improved repeatability (D300/12” Compact Prover 700 lb/min). 10 runs of 10 passes. The repeatability of meter factors for all of the runs should then fall within the 0.05%. and 4 runs of 25 passes.3. three or five runs are used. how many proving passes are required for each run for Coriolis meters? The technique of grouping proving passes into runs. as described by Method 3. In the next set of data there are three passes in each run.0008 1.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Method 3 (from API MPMS 4. At least two runs are needed to calculate repeatability. 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).9992 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 100 Passes per run 102 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .9996 0.05% tolerance. at 700 lb/min.9994 0. Appendix B) Method 3 involves accumulating individual prover passes to form a group (run). 5 runs of 20 passes. However. the number of proving passes required for each proving application will depend on a number of variables: Figure 8-9. for this particular example. is illustrated in Figure 8-9. each consisting of a specified number of passes. using Equation 9-10. Increasing the number of passes in each group decreases the variation between the group meter factors. The number of passes per run should not exceed 20. using 10 passes per run results in a repeatability well within 0.0002 1 0. The 100 prover passes were divided into 33 consecutive runs of three passes each.

1 is recommended. • • • • • 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. 3 to 5 passes per run will usually be acceptable. Repeatability versus number of passes per run.016 evaluated. even with 20 passes per prover run. 15 to 20 passes per run may be required. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. An alternative method for determining the number of passes required for a particular metering application is presented in Appendix I. sources of the non-repeatability need to be Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 103 .13 0.064 0. Using the damping factor of 0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Table 8-5. Due to the small size of an SVP and the subsequent reduction in the proving prerun time. When using an SVP.4. Repeatability As stated previously. and in detail in Section 6. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. An equation is then used to calculate the number of passes needed. If both meters yield the same type of performance. 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.025%). 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). This method requires an initial group of 30 proving runs of 1 pass each to be conducted.033 0.021 0.05% (±0. At flow rates of 75% or greater of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. the problem generally lies with the prover. a damping factor of 0. page 245. Passes per Run 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 Repeatability (%) 0. At flow rates of 50% or less of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. page 53.1 reduces the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. damping concerns are far more important for an SVP than for a conventional pipe prover. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. Results from Figure 8-9. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter.052 0.023 0. If this repeatability specification cannot be met.

One of the drawbacks of master meter proving is. a larger damping factor is only acceptable for relatively low flow rates. For example. To use a large damping factor. Master Meters There is a distinction between master meters and transfer standard meters. Any 104 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 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.67 seconds. or cannot be installed for logistical reasons.1. The proving results are subject to the accuracy of the master meter and the influence of process conditions on the master meter. Therefore. Transfer standard proving may be necessary when using an SVP. Transfer standard meters are used to prove Coriolis meters in applications for which the prover is undersized for the meter. The test duration will generally be one minute or longer.1. Dual pulse counters and a precision triggering system are required. a simple test can be performed. to determine a meter factor for the transfer standard meter. then moved to the site where it will be used to calibrate the meter being tested. the meter should first be proved with a damping factor of 0. Master meters are typically used in situations where provers are not available. 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. and the prerun time is less than 0. Master meters are generally calibrated in a laboratory environment.8 damping factor will need to be reassessed. a master meter is generally proved in one location. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. master meter proving is only used when no direct proving methods are practical. Transfer Standard Meters Transfer standard meters must initially be proved at operating conditions against either a conventional pipe prover or small volume prover. pressure. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. temperature.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 meter factor that is determined for the transfer standard meter removes any inaccuracies associated with the transfer standard meter. If there is no change in the meter factor. In general. Although the damping factor will have no effect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. The transfer standard is used as a means to pass along the prover’s calibration to the Coriolis meter being tested. and their calibration usually does not reflect meter performance under actual operating conditions. Due to uncertainties in the master meter performance. If the flow rate is increased the 0. the larger damping value is acceptable. the proving application will have to be evaluated to determine if a larger damping factor can be used. 8. and fluid composition. A damping factor larger than 0. inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved.8 should never be used. or for an oversized prover. then proved again with a damping factor of 0.8 instead of 0. to use a damping value of 0.5 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. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different damping factor. over the exact same time interval.8. and the Coriolis meter cannot be directly proved by the prover. The primary disadvantage of using a master meter is that it is an indirect proving method.

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

prior to reading the following sections. but the repeatability of the master meter proving results. the uncertainty from the master meter is not the accuracy specification for the master meter. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. temperature. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). 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. • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement). The uncertainty associated with the master meter is minimized by proving the meter. 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. The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. Also. and flow rate. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. There are two primary advantages to master meter proving: (1) the duration of the proving can be any length of time.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal. page 30. longer proving times will improve the results. the Coriolis meter’s measured volume can be compared directly to the master meter’s volume measurement. However. to allow comparison to the Coriolis meter mass measurement. because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer. and might be required to correct to the same reference conditions if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. (However. Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques.01% must be obtained. When a conventional prover is used. The master meter measures actual volume. and (2) when the proving is initiated. so no additional temperature or pressure measurements are required to correct for thermal or pressure expansion of the steel. must be met. if the master meter is used as a transfer standard meter in conjunction with a conventional pipe prover or SVP. • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. The volume of fluid contained in the metering section is minimal. The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in a ±0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards pulses for a conventional pipe prover. temperature and pressure indications are useful in ensuring that process conditions are stable. Therefore. which cover specific details about master meter proving.3.) If the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. at least two consecutive proving runs that agree to within ±0. 106 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. 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. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3.

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

8

**Meter Factor Calculation
**

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

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

**Pulse Output Configured for Mass
**

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

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

**Pulse Output Configured for Volume
**

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

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

where

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

where

Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement

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

Qmaster =

ρmaster =

Mmeter =

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

107

8

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

**Volumetric Transfer Standard Meter Uncertainty
**

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

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

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

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

2 2 2 2 2

where

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

Eprover cal =

Eprover res =

Ecounter res=

Edensity

=

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

108

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

8

E =

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

2 2 2 2

2

= ± %0.043

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

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

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

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

2 2 2 2 2

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

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

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

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

2 2 2 2

= ± 0.041%

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

109

8

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards

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

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

**Proving Duration for Repeatable Output
**

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

Precautions

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

**Accumulating Enough Pulses
**

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

**Process Fluid Conditions
**

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

110

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

**Flow Rate Proving Devices
**

Coriolis Master Meter

8

**Proving Duration Recommendation
**

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

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

**Number of Proving Runs
**

No fewer than three proving runs should be performed.

Repeatability

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

**Damping Factor Recommendation
**

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

**8.6 Coriolis Master Meter
**

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

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

111

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

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

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

000 pulses. page 74.000 pulses. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10.01%. At least 10. page 202. However.000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter. From Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty.) The overall proving uncertainty when using a Coriolis master meter would be on the order of: E = ( ± 0. and impact on uncertainty. Eprover cal = The uncertainty due to this component will be very subjective.01% ) + ( ± 0.030% ) + ( ± 0. (Eq.9. or ±0. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. a value of ±0.025% for all of the proving runs conducted. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above.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. Eprover res = This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. These meter factors should be documented and applied properly when proving meters in the field with the master meter.10% is only applicable in the meter’s upper flow range. Ecounter res= This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the test meter. In order to meet this recommendation.01%. The meter’s zero stability must be taken into account. For ELITE meters. a value of ±0. or ±0. The master meter should be repeatable to within ±0.030% could typically be expected. as explained previously. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 115 . (Refer to Section E.025 ) + ( ± 0. and is determined by how closely the master meter agrees with the gravimetric prover when it is calibrated. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. 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. this can be improved by improving the ratio of scale resolution to proving batch size. other than as a transfer standard.10% is used.108% The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods.10% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. A minimum of two runs should be conducted at each flow rate when calibrating the master meter. different meter factors may have to be used for different flow rates.01% ) + ( ± 0. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the master meter’s mass flow measurement. The value of ±0.

025 ) + ( ± 0. the overall proving uncertainty is: E = ( ± 0. (Eq. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. The ELITE meter density uncertainty is ±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. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.9.1% is used for the mass measurement component. 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.) For ELITE meters. for master meter zero considerations and impact on uncertainty. is used. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. page 114.118%. a value of ±0. except for the liquid correction term and the master meter uncertainty term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm.118% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. For the density uncertainty. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required. If the liquid correction factors are used. Using the values presented above. However. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. 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 ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant.0005 g/cc.8 g/cc. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the Coriolis master meter’s mass flow measurement and density measurement. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. From Equation 8-28. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the Coriolis master meter and the Coriolis test meter.030% ) + ( ± 0. All of the terms in Equation 8-30 are the same as those in Equation 8-29. Equation 8-8. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.01% ) + ( ± 0. page 114. For a fluid with a density of 0. page 81.8 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. the errors can be significant. If the meters are located close to one another.126% 116 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0625%. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. or the tables could be misapplied. page 115. page 202.01%. since both of these measurements are used to provide the volume measurement. which introduces a degree of error. (Refer to Section E.01% ) + ( ± 0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. as shown in meter factor Equation 8-28. these factors may not even be applied. this equates to an uncertainty of ±0.

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

In addition.8 (the factory-set default value).8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Repeatability The typical repeatability criteria is a total range of 0.05% (±0. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. the recommended damping factor is 0.025%). sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. 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.8 are not recommended. Damping Factor Recommendation Because no prover displacer is launched. which provides a stable output signal. If both test meters yield the same type of performance. 118 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Problems can often be identified by using redundant metering in the pipeline. Damping factors larger than 0. Therefore. damping considerations are not typically of concern when performing master meter proving. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. If one of the test meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. which would cause changes in the fluid flow rate. 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.

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

120 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

If the fluid temperature and pressure remain constant between the prover and the density measurement device. where ρp = Fluid density at the prover Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The primary advantage of using a Coriolis meter for custody transfer measurement is the ability to measure mass directly. (Eq. however. The temperature and pressure measurements should be taken as close to the density measurement device as is practical. It can be installed either at the prover inlet or outlet. the prover mass is easily determined. as shown in Equation 9-6. Accurate determination of the density is critical. 9-6) C tlm * C plm ρ p = ρ m * -------------------------C tlp * C plp For gravimetric tank and Coriolis master meter proving. 9-4) Prover Mass MF m = ----------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Mass corrected to the conditions at the prover. then the density measurement must be 122 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . it will be necessary to prove the meter’s density measurement. 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. Chapter 11. page 64. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. For volumetric proving devices. The subscript m in Equation 9-6 stands for the meter location. (Eq.9 Proving Calculations Summary Volume Meter Factor 9. (Eq. Density Measurement Device. For additional information. Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving.1. Equation 9-5 is used for proving the Coriolis meter mass reading against a volumetric prover. it is preferable to locate it between the meter and the prover. the fluid density at the prover must be determined. and the density at the prover can be considered to be the same as the density at the meter. page 139.2 Mass Meter Factor The basic mass meter factor equation is shown in Equation 9-4. and Cplp = Cplm. then: Ctlp = Ctlm. the density measurement could be performed at a location other than the Coriolis meter. The density measurement device should be located as close to the prover as is practical. The density at the prover (ρp) is equal to the meter’s density reading times the density factor. which in turn will result in incorrect product accounting. 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. or measuring temperature and pressure to convert to a standard volume. To allow comparison of the meter mass indication to the prover volume. refer to Using a Density Meter at the Prover. If the density is obtained from a density meter or Coriolis meter. and Using the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement. 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. page 27. however. A density factor (DF) is obtained. This eliminates the need for making a density measurement to convert volume to mass. These terms will then cancel out. page 25. If the density is not determined right at the prover. and Section 11.

The general criterion used when proving flowmeters is that the repeatability of the proving results be within 0. 9. For small volume provers 3 or 5 runs of 10 passes each is recommended.05% often indicates these meters require maintenance. 9. Meter Configured for Volume The API recommended equation for calculating repeatability is: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 123 . 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.05%. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. The repeatability is used as an indication of whether the proving results are valid. 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).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.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. which provides proper accounting of the inventory being measured. page 49.3. Typically. Too much variability could be an indication that there is something wrong with the meter. An alternative is to prove the Coriolis meter’s volume and density measurements and calculate the mass meter factors from the following equation: (Eq. or some other component in the proving system. a batch totalizing device can be used.4 Repeatability The objective of proving a flowmeter is to obtain a meter factor. (Eq. A repeatability value that exceeds 0. page 29. This value can then be entered directly into Equations 9-4 and 9-5. 9-7) C oriolis Meter Pulse M meter = -----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6. The number of proving runs required for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. the prover. A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter mass instead of the number of pulses accumulated. to provide some level of confidence in the proving results. When performing provings against tank provers. 9-8) MFm= MFv * DF where MFm= mass meter factor MFv = volume meter factor DF = density factor For additional details about this proving approach. refer to Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units. This value is based on experience with turbine and PD meters proved with conventional pipe provers.

If the meter and prover measure in different units (for example.5 to 1°F. When performing provings in which the meter is configured for mass measurement and the prover is a volumetric device. (Eq.05%. Specific recommendations for process condition stability are not generally available. which affects the calculated prover volume. and density) remain stable. If there is any variation.100 Pulses MIN A series of proving runs are conducted. meter measuring mass and prover measuring volume). as shown in Equation 9-10. in an actual field application it is often difficult to maintain stable process conditions. these variables should not be trending upward or downward. it should be fluctuating around an average value. and pressure variations of 1 to 5 psig around an average value are usually acceptable. Equation 9-10 must also be used when performing tank proving and master meter proving. 9-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN -* Repeatability (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------. A density variation of 0. the repeatability calculation must be based on the calculated meter factor. A rule of thumb is to monitor the temperature and pressure during the proving runs. Stability of Process Conditions When proving a flowmeter.* 100 MFMIN where MF = Meter factor If the repeatability calculation were based on the accumulated pulses instead of the meter factor. 9-10) MFMAX – MF MIN Repeatability (%) = ----------------------------------------. 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. 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.0005 g/cc will consume the general repeatability specification of 0. both measure volume). If the product density varies during a series of proving runs. pressure. the proving results will exhibit poor repeatability that is not attributable to the flowmeter. any variations in product density that might occur during proving would not be taken into account. The prover must be allowed to stabilize to the process fluid temperature prior to starting the actual proving runs. additional precautions are necessary. because the volume or mass may not remain constant from one run to the next. However. Products such as light hydrocarbons are unpredictable because they exhibit significant variations in density with 124 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . it is typically required that the process conditions (temperature. This can lead to calculating a repeatability value greater than could be attributed to the meter. because the effect of varying process temperature and pressure on fluid density depends on the type of fluid being measured. Temperature variations of 0.9 Proving Calculations Summary Repeatability (Eq. Variations in temperature will change the thermal expansion of the prover.

9. as shown in Equation 9-12.0002 g/cc will consume a significant portion of the 0. which is a total range of 0.” This method of determining uncertainty involves identifying all of the sources of error. (Eq.05% repeatability specification. Additional proving runs are recommended to improve confidence in the data. it does not necessarily indicate the same for a Coriolis meter. pipe prover or small volume prover.05%.05% repeatability specification can generally be achieved with a Coriolis meter.1%. and the fluid properties should all be checked to verify the entire system is stable and functioning properly. the repeatability specification for ELITE sensors is presented in Equation 9-11. such as crude oil/water mixtures. Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters Although a repeatability of 0. “Measurement of fluid flow—Estimation of uncertainty of a flow-rate measurement. Other difficult applications involve products with changing composition.0002 g/cc.Proving Calculations Summary Meter Factor Uncertainty 9 changing temperature and pressure. If the repeatability of a proving is greater than the usual repeatability. but it may require using proving runs with a greater quantity of fluid than would be used for a turbine meter.05 + -----------------------------------. the proving system. This is twice the common proving guideline of 0.05%. a Coriolis meter that is functioning properly and is within the manufacturer’s specification would be considered to be unacceptable based on the 0. the repeatability limits may need to be increased.* 100 2*(FlowRate) The base repeatability is ±0. 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. If density cannot be maintained within 0. The total uncertainty is determined by performing a square root of the sum of the squares calculation on all of the error components. A Coriolis meter is functioning properly if it is operating within its normal repeatability specification. A density variation of 0. 9-11) Zero Stability Repeatability (%) = 0. Alternatively. and determining the sensitivity of the measurement to the individual error sources.05% may be an indication of whether a turbine or PD meter is functioning properly.5 Meter Factor Uncertainty The meter factor calculated as a result of the proving can only be as accurate as the proving devices. The total uncertainty is based on the contributions of the following components: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 125 . If density cannot be maintained during the proving. The 0. For each error source. For example. A common method used to determine uncertainty is presented in ISO standard 5168. Therefore. it is recommended that a density sampling method be implemented to provide an average density for each proving run. then the Coriolis meter. the uncertainty is multiplied by a calculated sensitivity coefficient.05% repeatability specification. There will always be some degree of uncertainty associated with the proving results. This may require increasing the size of a tank prover.

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

Table 9-1.995 1-Jun MF = 1.003 Meter factor (MF) Acceptable meter factor range ±0. 1. includes a trend chart for tracking the Coriolis meter’s meter factors over multiple provings.0013 Uncertainty of proving method ±0. Acceptable Meter Factor Range Is Determined From First Meter Factor. In addition to the acceptance limits. 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. contains hypothetical meter factors for 11 provings. Variations in the meter factor from proving to proving. which exceed the user-defined limits.001 1 0. Appendix D. and acceptance limits at +0. If the meter factor varies from one proving to the next. Trend charting of meter factors will be valuable in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter and determining the required frequency of proving. held once per month.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. Alternatively. and every effort should be made to assure that the Coriolis meter and proving system are functioning properly. indicate that it might be necessary to perform provings more often. Figure 9-1.25% — that is. page 189. the meter factor from the current proving should be within 0.999 0. which are plotted in Figure 9-1. A New Meter Factor Is Determined.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 . page 128. the limits can be set around the average meter factor from a sequence of periodic provings.005 1.996 0. And New Limits Are Established.002 1. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are 0.998 0.Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting 9 A change in the meter factor greater than the user-defined limits should be considered suspect.035%. which is defined to be ±0.004 1. For many pipeline applications. Meter Factor Trend Chart.0009 MF = 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. new uncertainty limits would need to be recalculated to determine when it would be necessary to change the meter factor again.001 MF = 1.997 0. The trend chart should be developed with the meter factor of the first proving as the centerline. as illustrated in Figure 9-1.0005 MF = 1. When A New Meter Factor Falls Outside The Established Meter Factor Uncertainty Limits. it is not necessarily appropriate to apply a new meter factor to the Coriolis meter’s reading.25% and –0. the uncertainty of the proving method should also be included on the trend chart (represented in Figure 9-1 as dashed lines). as discussed in the previous section.25% of the centerline. Whenever the meter factor is changed. The proving uncertainty should be used as the criterion for determining when to change the value being used for the meter factor.25% 1. Uncertainties for each proving method are detailed in Section 8.

0005 Leave MF=1. 9-14) Corrected Measurement = MF * Uncorrected Measurement Three factors are available: mass meter factor (MFm). and often results in the meter factor being changed unnecessarily.00065 to 1. many users prefer to determine a new meter factor every time the meter is proved.0006 1. 9.0009 Leave MF=1.0011 1.00015 to 1.0013 1.0009 1. However. Trend Chart Data. These registers allow the results of a proving to be input directly into the transmitter’s memory. it does not provide an indication of the reliability of the proving technique. without having to modify the factory calibration factors.0005 Change MF=1.0007 1.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations Table 9-1. Data Are Charted In The Graph Shown In Figure 9-1.0014 Action Use MF=1.0015 1.035%) Determined to be 1.0009 Change MF=1. The values in these registers correct the meter’s measurements as shown in Equation 9-14. 128 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .001 Leave MF=1.00085 — — 1.00055 to 1.0 or Higher Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3.0012 1.00165 — — Although this method is technically correct.7 Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations In general.00095 to 1.00125 — 1.001 Change MF=1. The meter factor that is determined during proving is entered into the appropriate register.00135 — — 1.0013 New uncertainty limits (Uncertainty = ±0. the meter’s inventory will be determined from Equation 9-13. or use an external device to correct the meter’s measurement.0013 Leave MF=1. (Eq.001 Leave MF=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. 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. which eliminates the need for determining the uncertainty of the proving method and developing uncertainty limits.0005 1.0013 Leave MF=1. volume meter factor (MFv).0 and higher.0005 Leave MF=1. (Eq. The meter factor value used in this equation is the average meter factor from a number of proving runs. and density factor (DF).0007 1. RFT9739 with Software Version 3.001 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.0000 during proving. the meter factor determined will actually be a composite of the meter factor from the proving and the current meter factor. The meter measurement can be corrected by externally applying a meter factor in a flow computer or DCS. the mass and density measurements will not be corrected. 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 . or manually. However. If these two values were the same they would cancel out. if the meter’s mass flow rate is proved. Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended For batching applications — such as tank or truck filling. 9-15) MFnew = MF current * MFproving external meter factor. and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3. is not needed. and is set to 1. it will also correct the meter’s volume measurement.0000. the meter factor in Equation 9-13. The scalable frequency output of the Coriolis meter can lead to confusion. the meter factor can be set to 1. using the approach of determining a new K-factor as shown in Equation 9-16 is not recommended for Coriolis meters. the meter measurement can be corrected internally by determining a new flow calibration factor. Additionally. it is recommended that a new meter flow calibration factor be determined using Equation 9-17.) This can lead to considerable confusion and should be avoided. if a meter factor is being used. if a density factor (DF) is entered. In order to determine the new meter factor. However. the volume meter factor (MFv) is only applied to the meter’s volume measurement. (Eq. The flow calibration factor is a coefficient. a meter factor of 1. (Essentially. Likewise. Equation 9-15 should be used.Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations 9 Because volume is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. Entering a volume meter factor (MFv) will cause the MFm and DF registers to be reset to a value of 1. For turbine and PD meters this is accomplished by determining a new K-factor for the meter. Therefore. and the proving results would not be applied to correct the meter inventory. Then the new meter factor determined during proving would be entered into the meter factor register. Alternatively. pulse and analog. if the meter’s volume is proved. the MFv will automatically be reset to a value of 1.000. only the pulse output is affected by this approach.0000 would have been applied. the analog and digital values will not be affected. Values in the meter factor registers adjust all of the meter’s measurements and outputs — digital. The calibration factor resides in the transmitter. the mass meter factor (MFm) that is determined will correct the meter’s volume measurement. which is used to convert the time difference between the sensor pickoff signals to a mass flow rate.0 Model RFT9712 transmitters. where MFcurrent=Meter factor currently being used MFproving=Meter factor determined from proving RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. If the meter is then proved. 9-16) K–Factor old K–Factor new = -------------------------------MF proving Because the meter factor is already incorporated into the new K-factor. Alternatively. (Eq. This was done to prevent the accidental application of multiple factors to the meter’s volume measurement. have no meter factor registers. the meter’s pulse output will be modified.0000. as shown in Equation 9-16. For applications in which applying an external meter factor is not desired. The disadvantage to this approach is that the inventory measurement during proving will not be corrected by the old meter factor.0. If a MFm or DF is entered. The problem is. which should be entered in the meter factor register.

page 126). it is important that a trend chart be developed for varying flow calibration factors (instead of meter factors.6.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations (Eq. 9-17) FlowCalnew = FlowCal current * MFproving where FlowCalcurrent = Flow calibration factor currently configured in the transmitter One of the drawbacks of this approach is that coefficients within the meter are being modified. If there are Weights and Measures certifications associated with the meter. as described in Section 9. security restrictions on the meter would need to be broken to accomplish this. 130 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If this method is adopted.

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

132 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

• For products that exhibit significant density variations (such as LPG. to allow access to the proving signal without opening the transmitter housing. • A set of wires (a “pigtail”) from the transmitter’s frequency output should be routed to a an appropriate connector or conduit junction box. in which structural damage to other piping components has occurred. a damping factor of 0. proving a Coriolis meter with an SVP is challenging. Vibration influences between two Coriolis sensors is known as crosstalk. Proving Recommendations • Gravimetric proving is the preferred method for proving Coriolis meters.1 is recommended. • The factory-set. • Trend charts are the best means for tracking Coriolis meter performance over time and under varying conditions. • When a volumetric proving device is used to prove a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. • 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. is recommended. in a safe area. ELITE sensors have been designed to minimize crosstalk influences. • If the Coriolis meter’s density output will be used in the proving computations. output signals and other transmitter information. Transmitter Outputs and Configuration • It is recommended that the transmitter’s frequency output be used for both inventory measurement and proving. a volumetric master meter may be needed as a transfer standard. Additionally. because prerun times can be quite short.8. density reading. The damping factor should not be modified after the meter has been proved. vibration isolation may be required when sensors of the same size and model are mounted close to one another. • Because of the short prerun time when using a small volume prover (SVP). one of the transmitter’s analog outputs should be configured for density indication. A damping factor of 0. to allow access to HART communication without opening the transmitter housing. For small volume provers. (See Appendix D. The damping value should never exceed 0. ten or more passes per proving run will provide the best results. flow rate reading. • The transmitter’s frequency output should be scaled to provide the maximum number of pulses possible to reduce uncertainty due to pulse resolution. ethylene.) 134 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . default damping factor of 0. This will allow access to information on the meter configuration. liquid CO2). Generally. proper density determination at the prover is required. • A Coriolis master meter is generally best suited to meter verification for ISO 9000 requirements. but may be impractical for field applications.1 is recommended. • If the prover is too small to obtain adequate repeatability. a density averaging device. which will determine the average fluid density during the proving run. page 189.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations vibrate severely. • Multiple pulse counting devices can be connected to the transmitter’s frequency outputs as long as the resulting load is not excessive. in a safe area. Improper density determination is the major source of problems when proving Coriolis meters with volumetric provers.8 should be suitable for most proving applications.

make sure the prover ball is properly filled to provide a good seal.67 seconds. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. and the activation is repeatable.8. For small volume provers. Ensure the ball is compatible with the process fluid. A density averager will be required if the density variation exceeds this value. • 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. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. Refer to page 218 for information on vibration effects. Check the ball for erosion and scoring.1. • Make sure the prover detector switches are functioning properly. Piping 2. Meter configuration should always be checked to make sure it has not changed from one proving to the next. to ensure proper tempering of the system. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. Maintain sufficient pressure at the prover to keep the fluid from flashing. the density should vary by no more than 0. which may randomly trigger the counter. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1. or any flowmeter. make sure the plenum pressure has been properly set. A prover prerun of 1 second or Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 135 . • For small volume provers that use pressure to launch the piston. • If the meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved with a volumetric prover. make sure the volume of the hose does not change while the meter is being proved. Coriolis meter 4. • If flexible hose is used for the prover connections. Recording the meter’s configuration factors every time the meter is proved is a useful tool to aid in troubleshooting meter performance. Prover • For conventional pipe provers. greater is desired. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate for the prover size. Prover 3. The Prolink software can be used to save this data to an ASCII file on a computer. Entrained gas affects both the prover repeatability and the meter repeatability. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. • Crosstalk (vibration influences between Coriolis sensors) may be an issue if multiple Coriolis sensors are installed in the same pipeline. Piping • Check for piping leaks. The flow rate should never vary by more than ±10% while proving. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable. • Make sure the prover is appropriately sized. Watch for oscillating control valves. • 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. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below.0002 g/cc. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate is stable during proving. but does not drag. • A few passes of the ball or displacer should be made before initiating the proving. Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1.2 Proving Troubleshooting When proving Coriolis meters.Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 10. • Check all block and bleed valves to ensure proper sealing is being accomplished. the minimum allowable prerun time is 0. Check for switch bounce.0000.

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

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

138 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

140 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

Much of the information presented in the following sections was obtained from API MPMS 14. (Eq.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Coriolis meters measure density in the same way that other vibrating tube density meters do. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. for a detailed discussion on the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. as shown in Equation 11-1.1 Overview Meter proving is typically performed with volumetric provers. To prove the Coriolis meter’s density. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the mass flow meter factor that is determined. it is important to prove the density measurement against an established reference. When proving the Coriolis meter’s mass flow measurement. The density measurement from a Coriolis meter could be thought of as being obtained from a separate measuring device. The resulting density factor (DF) is determined as shown in Equation 11-2. Therefore. the density of the meter is compared to the density determined from a reference device. 11-2) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------ρ where ρ = Coriolis meter density measurement Refer to Appendix G. 11. Another option is to install an additional Coriolis meter at the prover to provide a density measurement. The information in this section explains how to obtain and prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. page 223.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement—Continuous Density Measurement. a density measurement must be made at the prover to convert the prover volume to mass. and influences on this measurement. The density calibration constants Ca and Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated. One alternative to installing a density meter at the prover is to use the density measurement from the Coriolis meter. the density factor (DF) is applied as shown in Equation 11-3. However. This API standard contains a wealth of information on the installation and field verification of density measurement devices. – C b f Because the Coriolis meter is a vibrating tube density meter. A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. Some users might have concerns about using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove the meter’s mass flow measurement.6. (Eq. it should be kept in mind that a Coriolis meter’s density and mass flow measurements are entirely independent of one another. 11-3) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MFm = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 141 . If the Coriolis meter’s density measurement will be used to prove its mass flow measurement. it falls under the requirements of API MPMS 14. (Eq. 11-1) 1 2 ρ = C a -. the Coriolis meter can be used in any service where a density measurement is needed.

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

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

With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. • Under HART protocol. • Under Modbus protocol. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15.5 seconds. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 27 (485A). it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible.1 mm2 wire). The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. The RFT9739 implements a selective digital software filter on the density output. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. RS-485 Multidrop Networks — Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. Digital Density Response Time Using an RFT9739. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. such as the RS-485. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level. the basic density measurement is updated by the microprocessor every 0. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. The damping value is a filter coefficient. Bell 202. or a display. A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. If polling addresses are used. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. Consult 144 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .1 seconds. with an amplitude of 0. There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. For proving applications. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22 (485A). depends on any additional “internal damping” that is applied. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Therefore. independent of the frequency of vibration of the meter.3 mm2 wire. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–).2 or 2. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator.2 kHz. the primary variable (PV) analog output can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the density. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. the “internal damping” value for density should not exceed 0. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks — Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. requirements vary as follows.8V peak-to peak. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. Therefore. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Analog Density The transmitter analog output is typically used for process control. Depending on the selected protocol. the response time of the digital density made available to digital outputs. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0. A limitation of analog outputs is that they must be properly scaled and trimmed to provide an accurate measurement. 15 meters for 0. The baud rate is limited to 1200 baud. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. The value of the “internal damping” can be varied from 0 to 8192 seconds. However. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–).

the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). The RFT9739 provides functions for trimming the analog output with a HART Communicator or the Prolink Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 145 . With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. It is recommended that no additional damping be applied to the analog density output.7 to 0.9 g/cc = 20 mA. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 the HART Communicator or ProLink manual when carrying out these operations.0 g/cc = 4 mA. the density-to-current relationship would be: X–4 ρ – 0. which can be used to apply additional damping to the analog output density measurement. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–).9 – 0. and 0.0125 X (mA) + 0. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. If density averaging is needed. For example. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). if it is known that the fluid density will always fall in the range of 0. this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal.0 g/cc = 20 mA. Based on these settings. Using these values. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA. and 1. (Eq. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. DCS).= --------------0. A typical configuration would be to set a density of 0. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–).7 --------------------. page 144). The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. 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.9 g/cc. one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device.0625 X ( mA ) + 0.25 If the resolution of the measurement needs to be improved.65 Analog Density Response Time In addition to “internal damping” (see Digital Density Response Time. so an external DC power supply is not required. 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. The most typical configuration is 4-20 mA. PLC. Scaling the Analog Output The analog outputs 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. If means are not available to obtain the digital density.7 20 – 4 ρ(g/cc) = 0. the density-tocurrent relationship is determined as shown in Equation 11-7. The added damping value is the time coefficient of the secondary filter. there is a secondary digital filter.7 g/cc = 4 mA. with a 1000 ohm load limit.5 to 8192 seconds. The value of the “secondary damping” can be varied from 0. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible. 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. For proving applications. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA. the density scaling can be set to 0. 11-7) X – X min ρ – ρ min ---------------------------------. 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. In this case.

The density meter in this case is the Coriolis meter. 11. If the analog output has been configured for 4-20 mA.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement program. Output from the RFT9739 is set to 4 mA. The density factor is then multiplied by the Coriolis meter density reading. 4. The purpose of density proving is to determine a density factor. Therefore. the current output can be set to any value between 0 and 22 mA. 2.001 g/cc. This is particularly useful for making sure the density indication device is performing the milliamp-to-density calculation properly. The upward buoyant force exerted on the hydrometer depends on the density of the fluid. which should be pulled from the 146 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The hydrometer only reads correctly at its reference temperature (usually 60°F). Devices commonly available for performing the reference density determination are described below. The mA current being measured by the input device is viewed. The density factor is determined by dividing the density measurement of a reference device by the Coriolis meter’s density reading. The choice of reference device for determining “true” density depends on the required accuracy of the density determination. 6. is collected in a cylindrical container. then steps 2 through 5 are repeated. 5. Hydrometers generally have a density measurement resolution of ±0. the trimming operation would follow these steps: 1. to obtain the true density. (Eq. The RFT9739 is then instructed to perform a calibration. some accuracy may be sacrificed when proving using a hydrometer as the reference device. If the analog output has been configured for 0-20 mA. output from the RFT9739 is set to 20 mA. 11-8) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density process pipeline at a point as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. steps 1 through 4 are repeated until an acceptable reading is obtained. This degree of resolution is not as good as the density resolution of the Coriolis meter. which is used to correct the density reading from the density meter.4 Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density proving parallels flow proving. the RFT9739 transmitter provides the capability of testing the analog output for performing troubleshooting operations. Therefore. If the mA current reading at the input device is not 4 mA. 3. Then the hydrometer is floated in the container. and the properties of the process fluid being measured. If the mA current reading at the input device is 4 mA. The mA current that was viewed is entered into the RFT9739 as the measured output. the current output can be set to any value between 2 and 22 mA. A fluid sample. using a current reading of 20 mA in step 5. It is important to remember that a density measurement under actual process conditions is needed — not a reference density measurement. because the volume of the liquid being measured will change with changes in temperature. A thermohydrometer incorporates a temperature measurement directly into the hydrometer. a temperature measurement is also required to correct the hydrometer reading to the actual fluid temperature. Fluid density is determined by reading the point at which the surface of the liquid cuts across the scale of the hydrometer. as shown in Equation 11-8. Testing the Analog Output In addition to trimming. Hydrometer A hydrometer is essentially a graduated cylinder with a weight in the bottom. Using one of these devices.

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

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

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

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

**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

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

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

162 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

164 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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 . Coriolis Meter Volume vs. Meter Serial No. gal/min Meter Tag No.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-2.

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

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

Coriolis Meter Volume vs.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-5. 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 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. 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.3454 Meter Factor = Master Mass/Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 170 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Serial No.

Meter Serial No. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.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.Proving Forms for Volume Measurement A Form A-6.Scale Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Volume Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 171 . Meter 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. 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.

0023 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Table A-1.0 1.0016 1.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.1 1. Buoyancy correction factors.0007 1.5 1.0007 1.0009 1.0008 1.7 0.0011 1.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.3 1.001 * kg/m³ *If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity). Proving conversion factors.6 0. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement .428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0. g/cc 2.098 Table A-2. 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 = 8.0007 1.0 0.9 1.4 1. kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density.8 0.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.0006 1.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101.9 0.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.0014 1.7 1.0012 1.0005 1.6 1.5 Correction Factor 1.0005 1.0005 1. the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above. Density.0009 1.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.0019 1.999098 k/m³=SG * 999.8 1.2 1.

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

174 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

and g/cc. gallons. for use in developing forms with other units of measure. Table B-1 provides conversIon factors. The forms use the units of lbs.Appendix B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement This appendix contains forms that can be used for proving the Coriolis meter’s mass mesurement. 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.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-1. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Meter Tag No. Conventional Pipe Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) gal pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No.3454 Meter Mass (lb) = (Pulses / K-Factor) Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin ) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 176 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Serial No.

3454 Avg Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor Avg Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 177 . Meter Serial No. Small Volume Prover Company Base Prover Volume (BPV ) Meter K-Factor Flow Rate Passes per Run Density Factor (DF ) (if applicable) gal pulse/lb lb/min Date Meter Model No. 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.Proving Forms for Mass Measurement B Form B-2. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. Meter Tag No.

Coriolis Meter Mass vs.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 . 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. 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. Meter Serial No.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-3.

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

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

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

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

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

Run Number:

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

%

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

= MFcurrent * MFproving

180

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

B

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

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

Run Number:

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

see Table B-2, page 182

1

2

3

4

5

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

%

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

= MFcurrent * MFproving

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

181

B

Proving Forms for Mass Measurement

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

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

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

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

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

182

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

Appendix

C

Proving Forms for Density Measurement

Form C-1 Form C-2

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

186 187 187

Table C-1

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters

183

184

Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters

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.

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

Meter Serial No.999098 * SG(15°C) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 187 .Proving Forms for Density Measurement C Form C-2.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.99012 * SG(60°F) g/cc = . Meter Tag No.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350. Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions Company Meter Model No. Density conversion factors.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc g/cc = . Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8. 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.

188 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

190 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1. Calibration Factor K–Factor Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Meter Factor Repeatability 0.0025 1.0050 1.00% 192 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0075 1.9950 0.D Proving Charts Form D-1.10% 0. Meter Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.05% 0.15% 0.9975 0.9925 Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.0000 0.

Density Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.10% 0.05% 0.0030 1.0000 0.Proving Charts D Form D-2. Prover Base Volume Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial Number Density Calibration Factor 1.00% Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 193 .0010 1.9980 0.15% 0.9990 0.9970 Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Density Factor Repeatability 0.0020 1.

194 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

196 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

3. contact the factory.0%. For example. Proper rezeroing of the meter will eliminate large zero offset errors. The meter would be reading high by 0. and follow these steps: 1. the meter must be rezeroed to bring it into tolerance. By operating the meter within a 10:1 turndown from its maximum specified flow rate. If the meter was rezeroed. If desired. Examples are provided below which illustrate cases where meter proving is needed and where meter proving is not needed. Use Equation E-2.9980. Before the next proving the meter was rezeroed and the zero offset of +1 lb/min was eliminated.1%.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.2%.9980 would still be used and the meter output would be 200 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 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. Now the meter has no zero offset error. 2. page 199. pressure. 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. Halt flow through the meter. If the meter zero is consistently within tolerance over a period of one year. if the meter had a zero offset of 0.2) if the measurement error exceeds acceptable tolerance. zero offset errors should be minimized. 9. 5. the meter factor of 0. and a 10 lb/min operating flow rate would result in a measurement error of 1. checking of the meter could then be discontinued.7 Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? When the meter is initially put into service it must be zeroed and proved. Restore any modifications to low-flow cutoff or damping to their original values. The average process conditions (temperature. 8. Record the average zero value. If the measurement error cannot be made to be within acceptable limits. resulting in a meter factor of 0. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until the measurement error is within acceptable limits. record both sets of data — before and after zeroing — and indicate on the meter zero chart that the meter was rezeroed. record the data collected from step 3 on form E-1. to calculate the measurement error from the average zero value and the operating flow rate.2. double check to make sure valves are closed and there is no flow through the meter). determined from zero readings accumulated over a 30 to 60 second time period.1 lb/min. E. whereas an operating flow rate of 100 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. the meter should be able to continue to operate without rezeroing as long as the operating flow rate is not reduced substantially. To evaluate the need for rezeroing. page 198).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. reducing the need to rezero the meter. and density) should also be recorded. If desired. (Prior to rezeroing. 7.2). to track the meter’s zero performance over time. an operating flow rate of 1000 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. View the meter’s zero reading (see Section E. page 204. 4. If a zero offset creates an error that exceeds the acceptable accuracy tolerance. If the meter was not reproved. This may require bypassing flow around the meter (see Section E. page 197. 3.01%. refer to Section E. 6. Reinitiate flow through the meter. Rezero the meter (Section E.

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. the meter does not need to be reproved every time it is rezeroed. so care must be taken in adopting a meter zeroing procedure. page 199. Repeat the procedure outline in Step 1a.03 lb/min. If necessary rezero the meter. Zero offset readings from all intermediate zero checks should be recorded. Prior to proving the meter the zero is checked.5 lb/min. Apply the following procedure in between provings: a. (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. and it is found that there is a –0. to make sure it has not drifted to make the meter fall out of acceptable tolerances. 1. rezero the meter. Routine checks during proving would still be warranted. In the majority of applications the meter will never need to be rezeroed. If the zero has shifted excessively. Determine the meter’s average zero reading using the procedure described in Section E.1% error at a flow rate of 500 lb/min. The meter is checked again after the next 2 week period and found to be offset by +0. to determine if this zero offset value is excessive. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 201 . until the zero is within tolerance. A program has been put into place to check the meter zero every 2 weeks. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. The meter is rezeroed and afterwards the zero is checked again. b. page 199. If the zero offset is excessive. The meter zero is checked after 2 weeks and is found to be offset by +0. there is potential for incorrectly zeroing the meter if valves are not fully closed. Any meter zeroing procedure should also include viewing the meter’s zero reading to make sure that zeroing is really needed. 2. Use Equation E-2. page 198. 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. d. It is determined that this zero offset would not require rezeroing the meter. Make sure to replace the old low flow cutoff after the proving session is complete. d. Since the meter is being monitored and excessive zero offsets are eliminated when they arise. Check the zero offset using Equation E2.2%. The following procedures can be followed to eliminate the need to reprove the meter every time it is rezeroed. This would result in a +0. 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. In this case. Based on the examples above. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. If necessary. Check the meter zero as described in Step 1a. However. It is determined that the error due to this offset is insignificant for the operating flow rate of 500 lb/min.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 0.1 lb/min. If the zero offset does not create an excessive error leave it alone. From this example it is easy to see why proving would be required after the meter was rezeroed to determine the correct meter factor. above. one may conclude that they should just establish a program to rezero the meter on a regular basis. The new offset is +0. c. the rezeroing maintenance procedure for the Coriolis meter could be eliminated. 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. c.05 lb/min zero offset. Prove the meter. above. During a proving session do the following: a.3. b.) Record the new zero offset on the proving sheet.

800 lb. The following hypothetical case is presented to illustrate some key points. Also assume that the same +1 lb/min zero offset (+0.2% error in and –1. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. The average zero offset should also fall with Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. The best way to eliminate these types of errors is to establish a meter zeroing procedure in conjunction with meter proving. page 198. Assume that 100. The average zero offset must fall within Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. Cavern Storage Example A meter has a +1 lb/min zero offset that has not been characterized. The net error would be 1200 lb.000 lb.9 Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Proper meter zeroing is critical for Coriolis master meters. Not having the meter properly zeroed can result in large errors.200 and flowing out it would deduct only 99.3. the meter would register 100. if the meter is not properly zeroed. most cavern storage applications have widely varying flow rates.0% error out). Special consideration should be given to the meter zero for these types of applications. To compound the problem. • The master meter offset should be checked as described in Section E. page 217). 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. Flowing into the cavern. However.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of only 100 lb/min. E. • It is also recommended that the test meter’s zero offset be checked as described in Section E.000 lb of product flows into the cavern and 100.3.2% error in the forward flow direction and a –0. As flow rate decreases the zero uncertainty component increases. unloading and cavern storage. page 217). A zero offset will affect the accuracy of the meter and will be passed on to the meter being proved.2% error out).000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of 500 lb/min (+0. especially in applications where the flow rate fluctuates greatly. assume that 100. • Before zeroing.200 lb and flowing out the meter would deduct only 99. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. different proving meter factors can be obtained for the forward and reverse flow directions. • 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. which results in a +0. Determining different meter factors for the forward and reverse direction is of little use if the flow rate is varying significantly. The normal operating flow rate is 500 lb/min.2% error in the reverse flow direction.8 Zero Considerations for Bi-directional Flow The meter is often used to measure bidirectional flow for loading. It has been verified experimentally that a Coriolis meter’s flow calibration factor is unaffected by flow direction.2% error in and –0. • The master meter must be zeroed every time it is moved to a new location.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E. It is important to make sure the meter is properly zeroed. both in and out of the cavern. the meter factor should not change significantly between the forward and reverse direction. As an illustration. Flowing into the cavern. the master meter must be full of process fluid at the normal process temperature. If the meter has been zeroed properly. The master meter uncertainty is the composite of the base uncertainty and the zero uncertainty. The net error would be 400 lb. The total uncertainty for an ELITE master meter is obtained from the following equation: 202 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . page 198. the meter would register 100.

7 lb/min In order to achieve an uncertainty of ±0.1% + --------------------------------------------.25 lb/min.* 100 Mass Flow Rate Minimum mass flow rate = 166. If the master meter is a CMF300.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E (Eq. the mass flow rate must equal or exceed 166. For example.7 lb/min.25 % = ± 0.1% + --------------------------------------------.25 lb/min ± 0.25% or less. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 203 . E-3) Zero Stability Uncertainty% = ± 0. the zero stability is ±0. The proving flow rate must exceed the minimum mass flow rate of both the test meter and master meter. Substitute the uncertainty and the zero stability into Equation E-3 and solve for the mass flow rate: 0.* 100 Mass Flow Rate It is recommended that a minimum allowable flow rate for both the master meter and the test meter be established.25%. it is specified that the maximum allowable uncertainty is ±0.

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

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

206 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

As pressure increases. the flow tube becomes stiffer. which would be interpreted as an increase in the mass flow rate. The factor is different for each individual sensor. The value of the calibration constant is determined when the meter is calibrated. page 209 (KP . where it is used in the calculation of the mass flow rate. (Refer to Appendix E. increasing the pressure inside the flow tube will cause it to deflect less. the deformation of the sensor flow tubes in response to the Coriolis force is influenced by the process conditions to which the tubes are subjected. The value of the temperature coefficient is different for different flow tube materials. which would be interpreted as a decrease in the mass flow rate.0002 0.009 0. The value of the correction coefficient varies from one sensor size to the next. Table F-1 lists pressure coefficients for Micro Motion flow sensors that are affected by pressure. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. (Pressure input is shown in the lower functional blocks in Figure F-3. The temperature signal from the RTD mounted on the flow tube is used by the transmitter to correct for the effect of temperature variations. Pressure correction is generally required only for 2-inch and larger sensors. As temperature decreases. KP 0. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. Table F-1. As temperature increases.) Temperature coefficient. for information about zeroing the meter.) The need for pressure correction is dependent on the sensor size and model. The pressure components of Equation F-2. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor.79% per 100°C change in temperature. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. and for Model DL sensors. Pressure coefficient. However. page 195. Meter zero. the tube becomes more elastic. Each sensor model behaves somewhat differently when fluid properties change. determined by zeroing the Coriolis meter at startup. Calibration constant.26% per 100°C change in temperature.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The values ∆tzero. making it more difficult to be deflected. 210 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The Coriolis force depends only on the mass flow rate of the fluid. KP — The pressure coefficient compensates for the influence of fluid pressure on the stiffness of the flow tube. and is independent of changes in fluid properties. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. Sensor Model D300 and DL200 D600 and DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient*. Pmeas and Pcal). are always used in the mass flow rate computation. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. increasing the temperature of the flow tube will cause it to deflect a greater amount. KT — The temperature coefficient compensates for the influence of tube temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube material.0008 0.005 0.0006 *Percent offset per psi pressure F. 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 larger the value of this factor. the tube becomes stiffer. Pressure coefficients for flow. tzero — The zero value represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs under no-flow conditions. The pressure measurement from an external pressure transducer can be input to the transmitter. page 209. are used only for specific sensors and applications that warrant pressure compensation. Key parameters of Equation F-2 are discussed below. The larger the sensor. The unit of measure is grams per second flow per microsecond of time difference (g/s/µs). KT and T (obtained from the sensor RTD).

Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly on page 210. Temperature effect on mass flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. to minimize or eliminate their influence on the accuracy of the meter.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. 2. temperature and pressure are the primary influence factors on mass flow measurement. which increases the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. The magnitude of these influences will vary from one sensor design to another. This will lead to a change in the ∆t between the pickoffs. there will be a measurement error. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect.5 2 Mass flow rate error (%) 1.5 1 0. and depends on tube material.5 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 316L Hastelloy C-22 Temperature (°F) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 211 . The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. and can be readily characterized. As temperature increase the tube will become more elastic. The effects of temperature and pressure are systematic and can be characterized and compensated for. Assuming a constant mass flow rate. and geometric design. a change in temperature or pressure will change the stiffness of the tube. 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. as more research is conducted and subtleties of the meters’ operation are better understood.5 0 -0. These explanations are likely to be expanded in the future. Figure F-4 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s flow rate measurement for stainless steel and Hastelloy sensors with no temperature compensation. which will cause the relative offset between the two sides of the oscillating tube to vary. The descriptions of these influences presented in the following sections are based on the current understanding of the sensor dynamics. 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. wall thickness. As indicated by Equation F2. page 209. The effects of temperature on the mass flow rate measurement is a linear effect.

If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. DL100.1 -0.1 Mass flow rate error (%) 0 -0. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter. and CMF300 sensors is an order of magnitude less than for the Model D sensors. 0. and a pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter.2 0. The transmitter then automatically compensates for pressure. and F-6b. D600. lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the mass flow rate measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. page 214. 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. page 213. The flow tube wall thickness.2 -0. which reduces the generated ∆t — even when the mass flow rate has not changed. and DL200 sensors are significantly impacted by pressure. Figure F-5 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. show the components required for on-line pressure compensation for a flowmeter.4 -0. The effect on ELITE CMF100.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 CMF300 D600 Pressure (psig) 212 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. (The RFT9712. Figures F-6a. Only Model D300. Table F-1. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. CEQ 6079 transmitter is capable only of reading pressure from a HART Bell 202 output. In bent-tube designs. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. geometry.3 -0. However.) Figure F-5. CMF200. page 210. However. diameter. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing).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. Pressure effect on mass flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry.

page 214. This method is only acceptable if the process pressure remains fairly constant (±10 psi for D300 and D600 sensors. ±100 psi for CMF200 and CMF300 sensors. The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. Using a direct 4-20 mA input is preferable to the HART polling method described above. The multidrop connection provides the pressure measurement from the pressure transducer using HART communication for polling. and cannot be used as a process variable output. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. ±300 psi for CMF100 sensors). It is important to configure both the pressure transducer and the RFT9739 with unique (non-zero) communication “addresses” to allow communication. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0. If a 4-20 mA pressure signal input is used. the pressure measurement is brought in as a multidrop connection on the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. the RFT9739 provides DC power to the pressure transmitter. because it is easier to wire.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Figure F-6a. The PV output will be driven to 4 mA in this case.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% 0.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. as shown in Figure F-6a. An alternative to on-line compensation is to determine a new meter flow calibration factor at the operating process fluid pressure.5W If a HART output is used. and does not disable the RFT9739 PV output. eliminating the need for an external power supply. provides faster response time. Therefore. the wiring will be connected as illustrated in Figure F-6b. In the 4-20 mA input configuration. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 213 .

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

15%) from the sensor’s specified maximum flow rate down to a flow rate of zero. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor. Generally. Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors.10% for ELITE sensors. The illustrated boundaries do not represent a signature curve for Coriolis meters. It is important to understand that the boundaries shown in Figure F-7 represent the uncertainty in the meter’s measurement.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F (Eq. page 216. determined from individual sensor specifications (±0.* 100 Mass Flow Rate where Base Uncertainty = Accuracy of sensor.4 0. However.3. page 198). as described below. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing. Once the amount of zero offset has been determined. The amount of zero offset can be determined by halting flow through the meter completely. and reading the meter’s mass flow rate indication (as described in Section E. If the meter is zeroed perfectly. 1 Nominal meter uncertainty (%) 0. a zero offset will skew the nominal meter uncertainty. assuming that a “normal” zero value has been captured by the transmitter.6 0. which represents the nominal uncertainty boundaries for a Coriolis meter. However. Figure F-7.6 -0. the transmitter will capture the “true zero” value. F-3) Zero Stability Nominal Uncertainty (%) = ± Base Uncertainty (%) + --------------------------------------------. 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. this difference is very small. and the meter calibration will fall within the base uncertainty (±0.2 0 -0. ±0. the measurement error can be calculated using Equation F-4.8 0. This relationship is illustrated in Figure F-7.15% for Model D sensors) Zero Stability = Determined from individual sensor specifications Mass Flow Rate = Operating flow rate From Equation F-3. Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset The zero offset is the difference between the “stored zero” value and the “true zero” value.4 -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 .2 -0. expressed as a percentage. a large zero offset could occur if the meter is zeroed when (1) there is actually a small amount of fluid flowing through the sensor.10% or ±0.

This graph illustrates the error that would result if the meter zero was offset by +0. In order to obtain an accurate zero. which is discussed below. which would cause the curve presented in Figure F-8 to return to the nominal uncertainty curve presented in Figure F-7. The magnitude of the drift and the direction of the drift varies from one sensor to the next.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 . repaired.* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate The impact of a hypothetical large zero offset on meter accuracy is illustrated in Figure F-8. which presents measurement error and uncertainty. 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. The zero offset error points shown in Figure F-8 were determined by calculating the zero offset using Equation F-4. serviced. the meter must be rezeroed. 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. Furthermore. if the sensor mounting is changed or the sensor or transmitter is removed. it is imperative that there be no fluid flow through the sensor. The uncertainty limits were then determined from Equation F-3. page 215. Zero offset errors can be eliminated by rezeroing the meter.5 0 -0.5 2 1. or otherwise altered.) A less predictable cause of a zero offset is a change in flow tube temperature. F-4) Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. page 195. The exact mechanism by which temperature affects the meter zero is not fully understood. Figure F-8. These changes in stress levels can result in slight variations in the location of the pickoff detectors relative to one another. (For information about rezeroing. Testing has been conducted on sensors to characterize the relationship between zero offset and temperature. 2.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy (Eq.1% of nominal full-scale flow. It is likely that temperature variations change the stresses in the flow tubes. see Appendix E. typical uncertainty limits have been established. Micro Motion’s uncertainty specification for the effect of temperature on the meter zero is presented in Table F-2.1% of the meter’s nominal full-scale flow rate.5 1 0. page 215. As a result.

F-5) 2 2 B + ( C * Toperating – T zero ) A + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. unless the meter calibration is recertified.08 ±0. Not every sensor will exhibit this amount of error. typically do not require rezeroing. [A] Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Nominal Full-Scale Flow Rate (lb/min) 500 1600 5000 25. lb/min = Zero offset uncertainty for the effect of temperature on the meter zero.10 ±0. product composition) and. Other Influences The following sections discuss other process variables and installation conditions that might affect the accuracy of the meter.10 ±0.05 ±0. The need for rezeroing will depend upon the characteristics of the sensor.* 100 Total Uncertainty (%) = ± Operating Mass Flow Rate where A B C = Base uncertainty. Assessing the need for rezeroing is described in Appendix E. °C It should be kept in mind that Equation F-5 describes the maximum uncertainty for all sensors. For applications that require a larger turndown. therefore.10 ±0. Legal trade requirements prohibit rezeroing the meter. Table F-2 also lists the meter base uncertainty and zero stability values.00125 ±0. (Eq.5 [C] Zero Offset Uncertainty for Temperature Effect* (lb/min/ °C) ±0.5 *Worst-case zero offset due to process fluid temperature change away from the zeroing temperature.15 [B] Zero Stability (lb/min) ±0. the less impact a zero offset will have. These influences are not well defined.025 ±0.000 Base Uncertainty (%) ±0. page 195. The higher the operating flow rate. Temperature-related zero offset errors will be minimized by rezeroing the meter.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Table F-2.016 ±0. the amount of temperature variation and the operating flow rates. Zero uncertainty specifications. Any zero offset error is eliminated by rezeroing the meter at the new process temperature. and can be used to compute the total meter uncertainty for varying operating temperatures.25 ±2. pressure. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 217 . °C Tzero = Temperature at which the meter was zeroed. and the magnitude of their impact will vary greatly from one application to the next. lb/min/ °C Toperating = Operating process fluid temperature. The total uncertainty for the meter’s mass flow measurement is determined using Equation F-5 and the values in Table F-2. ELITE meters should be selected because they have lower zero offset uncertainty versus temperature than Model D meters. Such applications generally have steady process conditions (temperature. % = Zero stability.

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

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

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

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

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

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

224 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

the density of the process fluid can be determined. The mathematics that describe the density measurement are presented below. which is described by Equation G-1. The frequency of the sinusoidal voltage from the pickoffs represents the natural frequency of the tube vibration. Shown is an ELITE® CMF300 sensor. The oscillation of the tubes causes the pickoff detectors to output a sinusoidal voltage signal that reflects this motion. This change in natural frequency will cause the frequency of the sinusoidal voltage from the pickoffs to change. Changes in the density of the process fluid will cause the mass of the flow tube/fluid system to change. 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. which will change the natural frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. The sensor’s coil and magnet driver are used to oscillate the flow tubes in opposition at their natural frequency. By measuring the frequency of the pickoffs’ sinusoidal voltage. page 226. The primary components of a typical Coriolis sensor are presented in Figure G-1.Appendix G Density Measurement G.1 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement As has been stated previously. Components of a Coriolis flow sensor. Figure G-1. 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.

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

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

obtained from the RTD.04 0. 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. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. 0. In addition to providing density. Temperature effect on density measurement — if there were no temperature compensation. (For example. is used to correct the natural frequency measurement for temperature related changes in the elastic modulus of the flow tube material. In many instances the end users of the density measurement instrumentation are interested in determining the percentage of one or more components in a mixture. Temperature and pressure are the primary factors that affect flow tube stiffness. the flow rate of oil in an oil-water emulsion can be determined. Due to design variations. If the tube temperature increases.1.06 0.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Because a Coriolis meter operates like a vibrating spring/mass system. page 225. 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. mass.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy increase in the tube period. the net flow rate of one or more components in a multi-component mixture can also be determined. the tube will become more elastic. Portions of the following sections are the same as presented in Appendix F. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly in Section G. each sensor model and size will behave somewhat differently when fluid properties change. its density measurement will be affected by changes in tube stiffness.02 0 -0. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass Figure G-3.02 30 60 90 120 Temperature (°F) 316L Hastelloy C-22 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 228 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The tube temperature. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. and damping. peripheral devices are available that provide additional information about the process fluid.08 Density error (g/cc) 0.) G.

the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). This would result in an increase in the tube period. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure. and the density measurement can be corrected. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. However. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. page 226. The signal from the pressure transducer is input to the RFT9739. Figure G-4 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube.26% per 100°C change in temperature. Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. resulting in a decrease in the tube period and a subsequent decrease in the indicated density.00030 0 20 40 60 80 100 D600 CMF300 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density Pressure (psig) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 229 .Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G of the system has not changed. Pressure effect on density measurement — no pressure compensation. (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. divide the density error by the operating density and multiply by 100. which automatically compensates for pressure effects using Equation G-10. However. The effect of temperature on the density measurement can be characterized. geometry. as shown in Equations G-8 and G-9. A pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the sensor as possible. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor. Figure G-3 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s density measurement if no temperature compensation were used. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress Figure G-4.00010 Density error (g/cc) 0. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. diameter. The flow tube wall thickness.00000 -0. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. The influence of pressure on the CMF300 density measurement is an order of magnitude less than it is for the D600. 0. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry.79% per 100°C change in temperature. A pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect.00010 -0. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. page 230. In bent-tube designs. To obtain the error percentage.00020 -0. which increases the tube frequency.

000006 –0. Some of the correction factors are positive. G-10) ρ corrected = ρ measured + K Pden * P meas Table G-1.0000031 0.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy (Eq. the CMF300. Automatic pressure compensation for density cannot be performed by the RFT9712 transmitter.5W 230 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . has such a slight density effect that *Standard-pressure model (DS300) only.000001 –0. Highpressure model (DH300) has no pressure effect. KPden(g/cc/psig) 0. psig Table G-1 lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the density measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure. Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 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. The values presented in Table G-1 illustrate that variations in flow tube geometry can entirely eliminate the hoop stress stiffening effect of pressure.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 transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter.00000022 where ρcorrected = Corrected density ρmeasured = Uncorrected meter density indication = Pressure coefficient for density KPden (Table G-1) = Measured pressure under Pmeas flowing conditions.5W 250Ω ±5% 0.000001 0. Sensor Model D300* and DL200 D600 DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient. which has a modified flow tube geometry.. Pressure coefficients for density. Figure G-5a. it remains well within specification over its entire rated pressure range. and some are negative. Model D300 and DL200 sensors have the greatest pressure effect on density.00001 0.5W 250Ω ±5% 0.

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

This results in an increase in the tube period and a subsequent increase in the density indication. the density reading is greatest when the tubes are oriented upward. Figure G-6 illustrates the effect of increasing fluid flow rate on the density measurement of a CMF300. respectively.003 0. but appears to be related to variations in gravitational forces. 0. however. The mechanism for this influence is not well understood. The frequency of vibration of the sensor flow tubes is lower when the flow tubes are oriented upward than when they are oriented downward. therefore. and lowest when the tubes are oriented downward.000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) 10.002 0. The RFT9739 uses a three-point flowingdensity calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density.001 0. K1 and K2 = Represent the measured tube periods determined when the meter is calibrated on air and water. the flow rate effect on density is insignificant. If the RFT9739 has software version 3. if possible. page 230. and is. the effect is not linear. it uses an FD compensation value. For flow rates less than 50% of the nominal flow rate (the CMF300 nominal flow rate is 5. rather than the FD value listed in Table G-2. (K1 and K2 should not be confused with the constants Ca and Cb presented in Equations G-6. beyond this point the error increases exponentially. Sensors shipped after March 1998 have a unique FD value listed on the sensor serial number tag or the calibration certificate shipped with the flowmeter. 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. and G-8.004 0.005 Density error (g/cc) 0. there will be a shift in the meter’s density reading. Therefore.000 lb/min). The K3 algorithm is based on water as the flowing medium. Fluid Flow Rate Increasing fluid flow rate causes the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes to decrease. The influence of fluid flow rate is negligible at low flow rates and increases with increasing flow rate.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy where = Determined from Equation G-10. all earlier RFT9739 versions use a K3 value. The FD algorithm is based on the measured density of the calibration process fluid. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. Therefore.000 4. The effect generally decreases with increasing sensor size. For older RFT9739 transmitters. more accurate. ρcorrected The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. page 226.000 6. the K3 value listed in Table G-2 may be used. G-7. however. Sensor Orientation If the orientation of the sensor is changed. The magnitude of the effect of fluid flow rate varies from one sensor to the next. Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement — CMF300 with no compensation. It is recommended to use this FD value.000 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 232 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .000 8.6 or later.000 0 2.

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

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

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

108 Wall thickness (in) 236 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application. the impact of corrosion on a Coriolis meter is complicated by the vibration of the flow tubes.10 0.116 0. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials. your sales representative or the factory for questions about material suitability. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material. a crack will initiate at a pit.02 0.118 0. which results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes.08 Initial wall thickness 0. Figure G-8. In this type of corrosion.114 0.112 0. Also. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. also illustrates the effect of material loss due to corrosion.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes. 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.06 0. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion. which will cause a localized increase in the fluid density. there will be localized compression of the fluid at the tube wall. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking. which illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube. stresses. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement — ELITE® CMF300 sensor. ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22. 0. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions. If the velocity of the flow tube wall approaches the velocity of sound in the process fluid.120 Density error (g/cc) g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 0. Once a crack has begun. Corrosion Figure G-8. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. For additional resistance to corrosion.00 0. A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data.04 0. However. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form. the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure. However. 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.110 0. additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube.

which approximates the flow tube velocity for a Micro Motion meter. page 234). which operate at low frequencies (less than 160 Hz — see Table G-3. it is very unlikely that velocity of sound influences would create a density measurement error for Micro Motion Coriolis meters.( Tube Period ) 2 0. The velocity of sound in liquids is significantly higher than in gases. Therefore. (Eq. because the vibrating frequency is generally much lower than 160 Hz.06 inches (the tube will move from peak to peak in onehalf tube cycle) Tube frequency = 160 Hz (equal to approximately 0. Table G-4.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. is provided below. 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.2 in/sec = 1.00625 seconds per tube cycle. This phenomenon should not impact Micro Motion meters. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 237 .) Total displacement = 0. 0.003125 sec = 19. A simplified calculation.06 in = ---------------------------------0.003125 seconds per one-half tube cycle) Total Displacement Tube Velocity = --------------------------------------------------------1 -.03-inch peak displacement).6 ft/sec The velocity of sound for gases can be determined from Equation G-12. (This calculation is quite conservative. and have low tube displacements (less than 0. Velocity of sound. Hydrocarbon product Pentane n-Butane CO2 Propane Velocity of sound* (ft/sec) 598 676 842 857 *Velocity when product temperature is 30°F. The velocity of the Coriolis meter flow tube is approximately 350 times less than the velocity of sound of pentane.

238 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

240 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

The influences described below explain how the combination of mass and density influences affect the volume measurement. the effect of temperature on density is of larger magnitude than the effect on mass flow rate. page 223). page 223. and velocity of sound. 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. erosion. refer to Appendix F. Thus. and any influence that results in an increase in the indicated density will cause a decrease in the indicated volume. However. volumetric flow can be determined.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Because the volumetric flow rate is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. (Eq. Refer to Appendices F. and flow rate on the volume measurement. viscosity. From Equation H-1. page 228. the calculated volume will be affected by all of the parameters that affect the mass and density measurements (described in detail in Appendices F. see Appendix G. and G. page 211. Temperature Figure H-1 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s volumetric flow rate measurement for stainless steel and Hastelloy sensors with no temperature compensation. Referring back to Figures F-4. page 205. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. an increase in temperature results in a decreased volume indication. coating. for details concerning other effects. The following sections illustrate the impact of temperature. page 205. as shown in Equation H-1. flow profile. page 223. vibration. 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-3. pressure. it can be seen that an increase in temperature causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to increase. 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. A brief discussion of zero influences is also included. and G. such as: entrained gas. density. page 205.1 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement Since Coriolis meters provide independent mass flow and density measurements. In order to understand how the mass flow measurements are made.000. corrosion. for density. H.Appendix H Volume Measurement H. sensor orientation.

0 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1. 0. Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation.1 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0 -0.0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Temperature (°F) Figure H-2.5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.2 -0.3 -0.000 Figure H-3.1 -0.0 -4.H Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Figure H-1.4 0 20 40 60 Pressure (psig) 80 100 D600 CMF300 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.4 -0.0 316L Hastelloy C-22 -2.3 -0. 2.000 -6.000 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .1 -0. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. 0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) -0.2 0.0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0.2 -0. Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement — CMF300 no compensation. Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.

resulting in a subsequent decrease in the volumetric flow rate measurement. it can be seen that an increase in flow rate causes the density indication to increase.000. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 243 . an increase in flow rate results in a decreased volume indication.. Refer to Section G. as described on page 212 for mass flow measurement. Zero Influences Changes in the meter zero will affect the meter’s mass flow rate measurement. a negative zero offset will cause a decrease in the mass flow rate measurement. resulting in a subsequent increase in the volumetric flow rate measurement. Refer to Meter Zero Influences. Referring back to Figures F-5. Zeroing requirements are discussed in Appendix E. with no pressure compensation. as described in detail in Appendix F. 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. Thus. the effect of pressure on density is much smaller than the effect on mass flow rate. subsequently. it can be seen that an increase in pressure causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to decrease. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. However. page 214. volume. Thus. page 228.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. starting on page 214. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. Conversely. The impact of pressure can be compensated for. page 232. calibrated at 20 psig. and on page 229 for density measurement. for additional information about compensating for this effect. A positive zero offset will cause an increase in the mass flow rate measurement. The RFT9739 uses a threepoint flowing-density calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density and. for additional information about zero influences on mass flow measurement.2. Referring back to Figure G-6. page 212.000. an increase in pressure results in a decreased volume indication. page 229. and G-4. page 195.

244 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

. . . . . . . . . Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate. .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 . . . . . . . Derivation of Equation I-1 . . . . . . . . . . .1 I. . . . . . . . . . .2 Method for Determining Required Number of Passes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of passes per run. . . . . . .

246 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

These data illustrate the repeatability results becoming significantly poorer at higher flow rates.Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I.994 0. Shown are typical results for a Model D600 sensor and an RFT9739 transmitter with a 24-inch Compact™ Prover. 1.002 1. page 102.6 0. Thirty prover passes are recommended for this initial group.8 0.006 1. A general recommendation for the required number of passes for a Coriolis meter cannot be made because it depends on the size of the prover and the fluid flow rate. The meter factors for the individual proving passes.010 1.4 0. for each flow rate.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. along with the pass-to-pass repeatability.8 1.2 1. Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate.2.05%.992 0. at a variety of flow rates.996 0.998 0. page 248. In order to use Equation I-1 the meter factors for an initial group of proving passes must be determined.6 1. The D600 data was analyzed using the pass grouping method illustrated by Figure 8-9. Figure I-1 shows proving data from a D600 sensor proved with a 24-inch Compact Prover. This analysis determined the number of passes per run that provided repeatability of less than 0.012 1.2 0. are shown in Figure I-1.008 1. The following is an example of how Equation I-1 can be applied.4 1.004 1. The results of these two analysis methods are presented in Table I-1. Equation I-1 was then applied to the first 30 proving passes at each flow rate shown in Figure I-1.0 0.000 0.0 25000 Meter factor 1. 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. Figure I-1.990 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Repeatability (%) Meter factors Repeatability Flow rate (lb/min) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 247 .

067 0.080 0. page 247.3 2.117 0.3. Repeatability criteria ≤ 0. PulsesMIN = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the fewest number of pulses.3 2. Proving repeatability for volumetric flowmeters is generally calculated as shown in Equation I-2. This involves proving the transfer standard meter against the prover. Issues related to using transfer standard meters and volumetric master meters are discussed in Section 8. page 247). At the highest flow rate of 24. the prerun time was only 0. page 30. PulsesMAX = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the greatest number of pulses.153 0.0 1. Because there are no volume limitations with master meter proving. transfer standard proving may be required.139 0. Typical results using a Model D600 sensor and RFT9739 transmitter. Therefore.326 0.040 4 3 0.67 seconds.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 16.05% Passes per run Repeatability from grouped from Passes per run data grouped data from Equation I-1 5 0.* 100 Pulses AVG where = Repeatability is given as a percentage (not a decimal) value. In instances such as the one described above.667 The predictions of Equation I-1. PulsesAVG = The average number of pulses per proving pass is obtained by summing the pulses accumulated from all of the proving passes.019 3 15 0. (Eq. repeatability is used as the criteria for defining how many proving passes per run are required.4 13.3 Pass-to-pass repeatability (%) 0.4 5.05% could not be obtained within 20 prover passes. The actual test data showed that repeatability of less than 0.126 0.039 5 10 0. It was determined that the meter and prover were incompatible at this flow rate.2 3.6 1.031 12 10 0. I.605 1.044 5 5 0. it was predicted that 51 proving passes would be required.038 12 15 0. R 248 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . then dividing by the number of passes. page 104. The values in Equation I-2 are obtained by performing a series of proving passes.45 seconds — below the recommended minimum of 0. Twenty passes is typically considered to be the practical limit for the number of passes per group. Number of passes per run.867 lb/min and less.239 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. correlate very well with the pass grouping method.042 6 3 0. where the prover is undersized and adequate repeatability cannot be obtained. At this flow rate. proved with a 24” Compact™ Prover (Results from Figure I-1. then proving the Coriolis meter against the transfer standard meter.5. I-2) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN R(%) = -----------------------------------------------------------.049 4 5 0. for flow rates of 19.299 lb/min.2 Derivation of Equation I-1 The measure of whether a proving is acceptable or not is the proving repeatability. Details of transfer standard proving procedures are presented in Section 3.

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

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

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

252 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

HART protocol. 210 temperature coefficient 210 calibration factor xxi output signals 45 digital communications 46 proving calculations inventory 128. 161 flow tube coating 137. proving accuracy. Installation. 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. Meter factor. See HART Communicator. Response time. 227 accuracy influences flow rate 232 pressure 231 temperature 229 calibration factors 158.Index Page numbers in bold indicate illustrations. Modbus protocol Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 255 . 97 transfer standard meter 108. A Accuracy. 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. 129. 160 digital communications 143 field proving 159 output trim 146 proving procedure 154 flow direction 202 mass flow accuracy influences pressure 213 temperature 217 viscosity 220 zero stability 215 calibration constant 209. 161 meter factor 136 meter recommendations 133 volume flow rate accuracy 243 Communications. 88 small volume prover 96. ProLink software program. 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. See also Damping factor. 109 volumetric tank prover 81.

32 prover steel 26 proving calculations density 26. 158 density measurement device 64 density proving calculation 155 determining mass meter factor 122. 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. 123 field proving 147 flow tube changes 161 inventory calculations 128 laboratory analysis 147 mass measurement 22. 141 calculating 156 correcting density reading 146. 126 computing proving computer feature 62 density measurement 64. 182 meter factor calculation 73 uncertainty 74.Index Conversion factor density 156. 122 steel pipe prover 87 small volume prover 96 uncertainty 126 volumetric tank proving 81 temperature meter factor calculation 22. 22 proving computer features 62 volume measurement 17. 24 volume measurement 17 temperature and pressure measurements 29 thermal expansion 18. 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. 187 proving 172. 230 buoyancy 172. 229 meter factor calculation 20. 159 zero reading 198 Density averager manufacturers 254 proving procedures density meter 25 transfer standard 31 volume 29 troubleshooting 135 Density factor xxiii. 182 time units 52 volume measurement 18 Coriolis sensor 208 components 225 corrosion 221. 122 meter recommendations 133 time between provings 12 D Damping factor 134 number of proving runs 103 prover size 100 proving accuracy 55 recommendations conventional pipe prover 90. 122 density proving 148 liquid meter factor calculation conventional pipe prover 86 Coriolis master meters 114 small volume prover 95 volumetric master meters 107 volumetric tank proving 80 uncertainty conventional pipe proving 88 Coriolis master meter 116 meter factor 126 small volume prover 97 volumetric meter 109 volumetric tank proving 82 mass meter 159 mass meter factor 94 meter 9 pressure 212. 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. 18. 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 . 11. 29 mass flow 24.

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. See Pickoff detectors Flow measurement analog output 48 custody transfer 9. 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. 53 nominal 202 normal 11 procedures 105 prover size recommendations 90 required number of runs 123 pressure effect on mass 212 proving 5.1 Density meter 4 API standard 153 calibration 65 density measurement device 64 field proving 146. 35 damping 54 mass measurement 22 meter factor calculation 113 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 257 . 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. 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. 17 recommendations 133. 237 Density sampling container 26 installation 153 line 147. 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. 147 fluid flow rate 136. 150. 161 in-line 22 mass measurement 25–27. 213 repeatability specification 125 F Flow detectors. 159 reproducibility 158 response time 53 small volume prover 93 troubleshooting 136 Flow rate effect on density 232 effect on volume 242 fluid Coriolis master meter 118 density factor offset 161 effects of damping 55 entrained gas 218. 203 operating expected 107 maximum xxi. 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.

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

136 rezeroing 200 temperature measurement 63 time between provings 12 transfer standard meter 104 trend chart 12. 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 . 28 recommendations 159 reproducibility 158 required equipment 79 RFT9739 transmitter 133 small volume prover uncertainty 97 small volume provers 94 volume measurement 29. 71. 85–87. 161 inventory calculations 128–130 mass xxiii. 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. 124 number of proving runs 90. 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. 100 prover prerun 99 tank volume 83 average 102. 27. 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. 45 volumetric master meter uncertainty 109 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 81. 71 volumetric proving 18 volumetric proving requirements 20 volumetric tank proving 79 Meter factor xxi accuracy Coriolis master meter 111. 27. 112 erosion 90. 243 proving devices 65 proving equipment 25. 247 flow tube changes 137. 122–123.1 flow rate measurement 241 fluid flow rate 136. 122 prover volume 4. 123 measurement devices 64 meter proving 10 pressure 136. 72 volumetric flow rate 4. 161 inventory calculations 129 mass measurement 22. 151 proving instruments 61 proving procedure 26. 32 mass meter factor 122. 101 volume measurement 32 reproducibility 126. 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.

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

143 density proving 151 meter information 47. 95 pulse interpolation 93 volume measurement minimum volume proving 19 prerun xxii. 20 proving computer 61 volume base xxiii meter factor calculation 80. 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. 91 prover size recommendations 100 small volume prover 98. 143 connecting to transmitter 145 density measurement density device 65 digital output 46. 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 .1 mass flow measurement 208. 52. See HART protocol. 229 mass flow 212. 57 meter zeroing 197 troubleshooting with 135 using for simulation 53 volume measurement 30 Protocol. 100 small volume prover 91. 243 tube stiffness 211 Process conditions xxii. 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. 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. 212 prover volume 23 sensor 229 volume 242. 103 reproducibility 126. 144 calibration 9. Modbus protocol Prover detectors density averaging device 65 density measurement 28 mass measurement 23. See also HART Communicator calibration 158 communication configuration 46–48. 93 transfer standard proving 30 volume measurement 18 volumetric tank proving 79 Index Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 261 . 26 optical 94. 209 meter zero influences 214 zeroing 197 Pressure coefficient 210. 117 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 master meter proving 106 meter proving 12 proving calculations 29 repeatability 90. 92. 89 accumulating pulses 89 damping 55. 86. 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. 99 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 stationary conventional pipe prover 85 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19. 136 rezeroing 200. 3 accuracy 210 analog output 48. 160 Coriolis meter proving 110.

17 mass meter factor 122 meter factor calculation 85. 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. 248. 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. 150 density sampling loop 151 repeatability 160 R Repeatability 123–125 Coriolis master meter 118 cross-talk 219 custody transfer 5 damping factor 91. See also Proving. 249 repeatable output 117 temperature 90. 153 calibration 161 density factor 156. 152. 29. 26 predicting 247–250 small volume prover 25. 102 number of proving passes 247. 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 . 98 recommendations 134. 26. 94. 158. 150. 147 density proving installations 149 procedure 154 recommendations 159 pass xxii. 94 proving recommendations 134 volume meter factor 121 Proving method 71. 249 number of proving runs 90 262 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . 148. 160 repeatability 125. 160 density measurement 64 density proving density measurement 154 density proving calculations 155 density proving device 65 density proving installations 148. 29. 30 Proving technique 35 Coriolis master meter 113 reproducibility 128 volumetric master meter 106 Pycnometer xxiii. 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. 117 average meter factors 102 damping factor 111. 94 conventional prover 25. 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.Index Proving density 149. 155 calculations 155 density measurement 146. 104 mass meter measurement 115 meter factor uncertainty 126 number of proving runs 123 tank 17 conventional pipe prover 84 Coriolis master meter 113 damping factor recommendation 90 volumetric master meters 106 traceability 71 transfer standard 30 uncertainty 127 volume meter measurement 117 Proving process laboratory analysis 147 proving 9 proving computer 61 volume measurement 18. 65 flow rate 71 in-line 71 meter factor uncertainty 125 proving connections 42 volume meter factor 121 volumetric xxii. pass accumulating pulses 110.

27. 232. 211 small volume prover 94 temperature measurement device 63 volumetric tank proving 79 Index S Sampling systems 4. 214 pressure effect density factor offset 161 density measurement 229. 231 proving accuracy 55 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 Rezeroing 56 analog output 48 error 199–201 frequency 197 installation recommendations 40 mass flow accuracy 220 reproducibility 136 sensor installation 133 trend charts 12 zero offset 215–217 RFT9712 transmitter 35 density measurement 142 inventory calculations 129 k-factor 52 low flow cut-off 56 number of proving passes 102 pressure 212 volume measurement 18 RFT9739 transmitter access to meter information 57 block diagram density 227 mass flow 209 Coriolis flowmeter 3 custody transfer 35. 213. 22. 160 vibration 218 volume measurement 20. 101 proving 248 proving computer 61 proving recommendations 134 proving runs 156 pulse accumulation 98–99 small volume prover 103 trend charts 12 troubleshooting 135. 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. 160 damping factor prerun duration 56. 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. 210. 46 damping 54 density 151 density measurement 65 fluid flow rate 136. 142 Sensor. Pickoff sensors T Temperature accuracy 241 coefficient 210 correction coefficient 226 effect density 18. Model D sensor. ELITE sensor.1 poor with leakage 89 pressure devices 152 prover size 90. 127 density factors 158 meter factors 136 Response time analog density 145 Coriolis master meter 111. 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. 106 transfer standard proving 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 263 . 32 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 83 Reproducibility 126. 228 mass flow 211 prover volume 19 volume 242 zero offset 216 Transfer standard proving 30–32. 228 flow rate accuracy 241 meter mass flow accuracy 208. 89. See Coriolis sensor. 99 reproducibility 136 tank proving 90 digital density 144 flow measurement 53 pressure measurement 213. 136.

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

.

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

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- B2590_API_RP_551
- Fusible Plug Loop Panel1
- EIL Spec for Instrumentation Works
- Instrproving Coriolis for Custody
- coriolis knowledge - emerson.pdf
- 9080 Optimass 7300 Flowmeter Manual
- A3 Alpha Meter 2008
- LV Bulk Metering Sri Lanka
- General Meter Manual 400-20
- Notation, Drawing Office Practice and Dimensional Coordination
- Coriolis
- Technical Data.pdf
- 24510-52
- CollegePhysics Chapter I
- 5054_s12_ir_32
- 5054_s12_ir_31
- SAT_Building Laws 6
- presentation1-
- lec46
- Global Cement Article
- 31000-32000探头防护盒
- Greek Latin Roots
- TSD 4
- 101 FA09 HE3Solved
- Taper
- Install Programing Raven Hagie
- 24137158 Force Energy Year 6
- BASE REQUIREMENTS
- GuruReport Guide to Foreign Exhibiting
- Fun for All the Family 1 22 Games to Practise Numbers
- Proving

Are you sure?

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

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.