## Are you sure?

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

October 1998

Proving Coriolis Flowmeters

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

Foreward

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

.

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

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

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

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

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensor Installation . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 9. . . . . . . . . Transmitter Outputs and Configuration . . . . . . . . .2 9. . .0 or Higher .1 9. . . . . . . . . . . Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Recommendations. 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 9. . 131 10. 119 9. .Contents 9 Proving Calculations Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 9. . . . . . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . Poor Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions. . . . . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 133 133 134 134 135 135 136 vi Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Proving Troubleshooting . . . .0 . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Volume . . . . . . . . .4 Volume Meter Factor . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3.7 10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proving Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . .3 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Uncertainty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Summary Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

xiv Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

xviii Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

2 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

6 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

8 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

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 .10% 0.6175 4/5/98 395 – – – 75 No 76 88 .6111 Was meter rezeroed? 0.6112 8/2/98 435 – – – 94 No 84 87 .6098 9/6/98 410 – – – 93 No 82 89 .614 6/7/98 450 – – – 92 No 80 90 . Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run ABC Company Butadiene XYZ Proving Co.0025 1.9950 0.General Proving Concepts How Often Should a Coriolis Meter Be Proved? 2 Figure 2-1. 3.0000 0.00% • • • • • • • Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 13 .584. Calibration Factor K–Factor CMF300 123456789 RFT9739 987654321 667.0050 1.75 60 pulse/lb Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.08661 4 Mass Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.6126 7/5/98 445 – – – 95 No 82 89 . Location Fluid Proving Co.15% Repeatability 0. Sample proving trend chart.6196 3/8/98 400 – – – 65 No 73 90 .6154 5/3/98 440 – – – 85 No 78 88 .05% • 0.0075 1.

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

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

16 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

3. illustrates the maximum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for volumetric measurement. For stationary provers this is typically accomplished by activating an electrical switch. provides additional details on proving calculations. Insert the proving ball into the receiver. Check for leaks. (Eq. page 21. 3-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp MF v = -------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor where MFv = Meter factor. Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0. 8.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. Maximum Volume Proving Requirements Figure 3-2. 11. 2. Pressure and temperature at the prover is not representative of the conditions at the meter.* 100 Pulses MIN 20 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 166 (Appendix A). and must be diverted around the meter. Connect the meter’s pulse output to the proving counter. can be used to record the proving data and perform the proving calculations. Connect the prover detector outputs to the pulse counter. 3-5) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN Repeatability(%) = --------------------------------------------------------. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter. 7. 5. and bleed any gas out of the prover as necessary. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic. 9. If the repeatability is acceptable. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. 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. page 119. 6. Perform proving calculations. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Volume Measurement 4. The meter must be blocked in to obtain zero flow through the meter. The flow of process fluid cannot be stopped to allow the meter to be zeroed. Components have been added to the minimum system to accommodate the following special circumstances: 1. 10. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. 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. Perform two or three trial proving runs to ensure the temperature and pressure has stabilized (generally done by tripping a switch that releases the prover ball from the receiver into the prover). Proving form A-1. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. Equation 3-6 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations.

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

The fluid density at the prover can be accurately determined from the pressure and temperature measurements. Equation 3-7 is used to calculate the meter factor for the proving. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the density meter. and this average density be used in the meter factor calculation. The Coriolis meter should be located close to the prover.2 Meter Configured For Mass Measurement When a Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved against a volumetric prover. The Ctlp and Cplp correction factors are determined from API MPMS look-up tables. A single shutoff valve can be used to completely halt fluid flow through the sensor to allow zeroing. Determined from an in-line density meter located at the prover. Any error in the determination of the density will result in an equivalent error in the meter factor. an accurate density determination at the prover must be made. The frequency of determining the density factor may be reduced if the density factor continually remains consistent from one proving to the next. A density sampling system is used to determine a density factor for the Coriolis meter. 2. This is particularly true of light hydrocarbons. using the average number of pulses from the proving runs. the prover volume must be converted to mass units to allow comparison to the mass measured by the meter. it will be necessary to prove the density measurement to obtain a density factor (DF). due to fluctuations in product composition or process conditions. (Eq. and the meter factor may be in error. it will be difficult to obtain acceptable repeatability. If the fluid density varies while the meter is being proved. page 166 (Appendix A). In order to convert the prover volume to mass. This system can only be used under the following conditions: 1. 3. Calculated from measured temperature and pressure. Minimum Mass Proving Requirements Figure 3-3 illustrates the minimum equipment requirement for proving a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. If a density measurement device is used. 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. Products that expand significantly when flow is halted will require two valves to block the meter in.05% is commonly required. 22 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If the repeatability is acceptable. In this situation. This method is limited to well characterized products of known composition. Determined from the Coriolis meter density measurement. it is recommended that the average fluid density during the proving run be determined. It would be reasonable to prove the density measurement every time the Coriolis meter’s flow measurement is proved. Actual field practice may vary from these recommendations based on the required accuracy levels. or from API equation 2540 and compressibility equations. 2. 3. A repeatability of less than 0.3 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. For many process fluids the actual flowing density (not the density at standard conditions) does not remain constant. The fluid density can be determined from any of the following methods: 1.

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

page 176 (Appendix B). 10. when performing a mass-tovolume proving. the repeatability can be based on the number of pulses accumulated. 9.8 g/cc. and shows the calculation steps. Record the pressure and temperature at the prover during each proving run. for mass-to-volume proving. the product density must first be determined. Therefore. (Eq. Proving form B-1. the Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. Conduct the actual proving by performing a series of proving runs. 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. 7. For volumeto-volume proving. page 119. Based on a fluid with a density of 0. 24 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . calculation is shown in Equation 3-8. Then the meter factors for the individual proving runs are calculated as shown in Equation 3-9. A proving run is completed once the prover ball has gone through an entire measurement cycle. and the repeatability is based on the maximum and minimum meter factors from the runs. Record the approximate fluid flow rate during the proving. Insert the proving ball into the receiver.0002 g/cc. The product density during the proving should vary by no more than 0. Before calculating the meter factor. If the product density were to vary during the proving.* 100 MF MIN Generally the proving results must have a repeatability of less than 0.05% in order for the proving to be considered to be valid. the repeatability should be based on the meter factor for the individual provings. not the accumulated pulses. After each run record the pulses accumulated from the meter from the pulse counter.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement 6. 3-8) MF MAX – MF MIN Repeatability(%) = ----------------------------------------. the pulse repeatability may be unacceptable. provides additional information on proving calculations. Next. This where ρp = fluid density under flowing conditions at the prover Section 9. (Eq. 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). 8. Enable the prover pressure and temperature instrumentation. However. Perform proving calculations. and three runs of 10 to 15 passes each is recommended for small volume provers. Five proving runs are recommended for conventional provers. This leaves only a 0. 11. A look-up table or an equation is used to obtain the density of the fluid from the recorded pressure and temperature.025% repeatability allowance for the meter and the rest of the proving system. this level of density variation would take up 0. the pulse repeatability would not account for variations in product density. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are determined from Equation 3-9. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. can be used to record data. Specific procedures will depend on whether the instrumentation is manual or electronic.025% of the repeatability specification.

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

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. If the fluid is expansive. (Figure 3-4 does not show the details of the density proving equipment. as shown in Equation 3-10. V10. it must be enabled. and V9. provides additional information on proving calculations. While the meter is being proved.) Once conditions have stabilized. 3-11) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MF m = --------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses --------------------------------- K–Factor Section 9. 7. The Ctsp and Cpsp correction factors for the effects on the prover steel are determined from standard equations. 5. Proving Calculations As discussed for minimum mass proving. 4. page 25. are described below: 1. The density averager is connected to the prover detectors and the density meter’s density measurement output. and shows the calculation steps. Valve V11 is used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. 26 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . page 146. (Eq. The meter factors for the individual proving runs are then calculated as shown in Equation 3-11. The average density is recorded at the end of the proving pass or run. page 186 (Appendix C). for a complete description of this process. 3.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Meter Configured For Mass Measurement using a density meter at the prover. beyond those described beginning on page 23. the density meter’s density factor (DF) must be determined. (Eq. the system is returned to normal operation by opening valve V8 and closing valves V10 and V9. the repeatability value is calculated by using the meter factor. This would result in an incorrect zero value being determined. page 176 (Appendix B). This is accomplished by opening valves V7. the density reading from the density meter is recorded along with the other proving data. If the process demands that flow through the system cannot be halted. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. page 119. a density sample is collected and the density meter’s density reading is recorded simultaneously. is used for determining the density meter’s density factor. the meter may have to be blocked in by closing both valves V2 and V3. Valve V11 is still used to generate sufficient pressure drop to obtain a representative fluid sample in the density loop. 2. which are depicted in Figure 3-4. to ensure the density factor is repeatable. Although form C-1 specifies that it is for proving the Coriolis meter density. The density meter must be enabled. closing a single valve downstream of the meter may result in reverse flow through the meter. 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. page 24). it is applicable to any density meter. Refer to Section 11. If the optional density averager is used. can be used to record data. After the density factor has been determined. Density proving form C-1.4. using the appropriate coefficients for the prover material of construction. For safety reasons valve V8 would need to be opened before closing valves V10 and V9.2°C. if required. This process is repeated two to three times. not the meter pulses (as shown in Equation 3-8. 6. An additional calculation is also performed: the determination of the density meter’s density factor. then the process fluid must be diverted around the meter by opening valve V1 during the zeroing operation. This will either be obtained from the density meter or the density averager. Care should be taken to ensure that flashing or cavitation does not result from dropping the pressure. Proving form B-1. Therefore. The prover detectors trigger the averager to average the density meter’s density measurement during the proving run.

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

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

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

the repeatability calculation can be based on the number of pulses measured. repeatable proving results. the master meter’s meter factor has not been established under actual operating conditions. the Coriolis meter and turbine meter measurements can be compared for one minute or more. The meter is proved as a volume meter as described in Section 3. The volume meter factor is calculated from either Equation 3-6. If the prover prerun is too short. then the Coriolis meter is proved against the turbine meter. Since there is no fixed prover volume limiting the proving time. If a larger prover is not available. This occurs most commonly when a small-volume prover is used to prove a relatively large Coriolis meter. resulting in a more precise measurement. 5. the more measurement samples that are made. page 20. Master meter proving has uncertainty associated with the effect of the actual operating conditions on the master meter’s calibration. 3. The master meter is brought out to the field. whichever is appropriate. page 22. there is usually a drop in flow rate. The K-factor (pulse scaling factor) must be checked. Adjustments to this value or the inventory calculation may be required to ensure that the inventory measurement remains correct during the proving. page 29. (Eq. This provides a longer time base for the Coriolis meter to perform measurements. page 186 (Appendix C). It is important to distinguish transfer standard proving from master meter proving. is used to obtain the volume meter factor (MFv). as shown in Proving form A-1. is used to obtain the density factor (DF). The transfer standard method uses a meter with a very fast response time. page 166 (Appendix A). The meter’s density factor is determined from Equation 3-12. The longer the proving time. In some applications the prover is too small for the Coriolis meter. The calculation shown in Equation 3-14 can be added to the bottom of form A-1.1. page 20. The fundamental measurement of a Coriolis meter is time based. 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. The turbine meter is first proved against the prover. Equation 3-5. 4. When the proving is initiated. due to a mismatch between the prover size and the Coriolis meter’s response time. there may be difficulties in obtaining good repeatability.3 Transfer Standard Proving When using small volume provers or undersized conventional provers. Therefore. ® 3. If the proving run is too short. and is used as the reference to determine a meter factor for the test meter. and form C-1. The meter is returned to the mass measurement configuration once the proving is completed. Master meter proving typically utilizes a “master” meter that has been calibrated in a laboratory setting. This will result in an error in the meter factor that is determined. or Equation 3-7. to prove the Coriolis meter.3 Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving Communicator or the Micro Motion ProLink software program. the Coriolis meter pulse output may not represent the actual flow rate before the pulse accumulation begins. page 17. 3-14) MF m = MF v * DF Proving Calculations Because the meter is configured for volume measurement during the proving process. and depends on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . such as a turbine meter. a transfer standard proving method can be employed. resulting in improved repeatability. and cannot be used to provide accurate. resulting in poorer repeatability. the Coriolis meter will inherently perform fewer measurements.

the turbine meter must first be proved. however. temperature and flow rate are recorded while the meter is being proved. For transfer standard proving. A volume meter factor (MFv) is determined for the turbine meter. page 22. density meters and density averagers are not included. page 17. The pressure. and Section 3. Then the transfer standard meter is used immediately to determine the meter factor for the Coriolis meter. are presented below: 1. additional items such as bypass loops. illustrates the equipment requirement for performing a transfer standard proving. This method can be used for a Coriolis meter configured for volume or mass measurement. page 31. Only the minimum equipment requirement is shown.1. and Section 3. A two-channel pulse counter. beyond those described Section 3. page 17. 2. Flow Sensor V2 V1 V3 Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Prover detectors 2-channel pulse counter Prover loop For transfer standard proving. Prior to proving the Coriolis meter. 4. The procedures described in Section 3. for additional equipment requirements. page 17. Proving Procedure The additional steps involved in performing a transfer standard proving. should be followed to prove the turbine meter.Proving Procedures: Conventional and Small Volume Provers Transfer Standard Proving 3 Figure 3-6.2. It is important that the turbine meter be proved at the same flow rate as the Coriolis meter. The unique items required for a transfer standard proving are: 1. the uncertainty associated with changing process conditions is eliminated. Additionally.2. Refer to Section 3. The proving duration should be between one and two minutes. A series of three to five proving runs are performed. The Coriolis meter is then proved against the turbine meter. A fast response turbine meter 2. these components may be required.1. Requirements for using transfer standard for proving Coriolis meter. by activating the twochannel pulse counter to accumulate pulses from both meters. 3. Transfer standard proving configuration. against the prover.1. Any changes in the flow rate may affect the turbine meter’s meter factor. Proving Equipment Figure 3-6. page 22. the meter factor for the transfer standard meter is determined at actual operating conditions. 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 . 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.

or from the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. as shown by Equation 3-10. Proving form A-1. If the Coriolis meter is used. if the temperature and pressure at the Coriolis meter and turbine meter are sufficiently different. 3-15) Turbine Meter Pulses * MF -------------------------------------------------------------turbine Turbine K–Factor MF v = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis Meter Pulses -------------------------------------------------------------- Coriolis K–Factor However. Then. is used to convert the density at the Coriolis meter to the transfer standard conditions. If a density meter or the Coriolis meter are used to determine density. page 29.3 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. * 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. (Eq. can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. Proving form A-1. page 24. page 187. the repeatability must be based on the meter factor. from a density meter at the prover. The meter factor is calculated as shown in Equation 3-16. repeatability cannot be based on the pulses accumulated per proving run. page 166 (Appendix A). The repeatability must be based on the meter factor. page 26. and form C-2. Then proving form B-4. can be used to determine the transfer standard meter’s meter factor. page 24. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. (Eq. then Equation 3-13. as shown in Equation 3-8. page 186 (Appendix C). Mass Measurement As with the other proving methods for a Coriolis meter configured for mass measurement. as shown in Equation 3-7. as shown in Equation 3-8. The meter factor is calculated from Equation 3-15. These factors would be applied in the same fashion as for provers. is used to determine the density factor. 3-16) Turbine Meter Pulses ---------------------------------------------------------------. page 169. page 29. page 179 (Appendix B). Volume Measurement Since the proving volume is not constant with this method. 32 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . proving form A-4. a density factor will need to be determined. page 22. liquid temperature and pressure correction factors will be required. page 166 (Appendix A). density proving form C-1. If required. or Equation 3-12. but depends on the proving time. is used to determine the Coriolis meter’s meter factor. may be needed to correct to the conditions at the turbine.

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

34 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

36 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

38 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

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

44 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

) For more information about the HART Communicator. and operates in the Microsoft® Windows® graphical environment. PLC. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. or DCS) that supports the HART or Modbus protocol can be used to acquire the digital information directly from the transmitter. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. Baud rates between 1200 baud and 38. HART Protocol Under HART protocol. If polling addresses are used. RS-485 Multidrop Networks Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. Depending on the selected protocol. and must not exceed 4000 feet (1220 meters) in length. with a baud rate limited to 1200 baud. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22(485A). With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. which will convert either Bell 202 or RS-485 communications to RS-232. use terminals 26 (485B) and 27 (485A). Using the HART Communicator with Micro Motion Transmitters. the SMART FAMILY® Interface Model 268.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. cannot be used with later-model RFT9739 transmitters. For more information.2 or 2. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. requirements vary as follows. 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 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 ProLink program has additional features for performing meter diagnostics and logging data to ASCII data files for further analysis. For more information. This handheld device is particularly convenient for field configuration and monitoring of the meter. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. Micro Motion also has available a PC-based communications package.4 kilobaud can be selected. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Modbus Protocol Under Modbus protocol. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 24 AWG (0. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals DigitalInformation 6 Interface to Digital Information The transmitter supports two digital communications protocols: HART and Modbus®. Using the RS-485 Output The RS-485 output signal is a ±5V square wave referenced to the transmitter ground. The program requires a personal computer with an Intel® 386 or higher-version microprocessor. see the Micro Motion instruction manual entitled. Using ProLink Software with Micro Motion Transmitters. (The older Rosemount communicator. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. the ProLink software program. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 47 .2 kHz.

page 144.3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. 15 meters for 0.3 mm2 wire. the frequency/pulse output is easily totalized by simply counting pulses. one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device. Therefore. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. The analog information must be integrated to obtain the total flow. the analog output is not recommended for inventory measurement. If a density measurement is needed. requires an input from an external DP transducer) As stated previously. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. The analog output is useful for monitoring flow rate independently of the frequency/pulse output.1 mm2 wire). The analog outputs are useful for providing general process information. this output can be used to evaluate meter rezeroing requirements.2 Analog Output The transmitter analog output is used primarily for process control applications.The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. 48 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal. analog outputs are not proved easily. Any two of the following variables can be obtained from the analog outputs: • • • • • Mass flow rate Density Volumetric flow rate Temperature Differential pressure (optional. There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. requires an input from an external DP transducer) • Viscosity (optional calculation. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0. and is not typically used for custody transfer measurement. or refer to Analog Density. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. Therefore. Analog outputs must be properly scaled and trimmed. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0. can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. By applying no low-flow cutoff to an analog flow measurement. in order to carry out these operations. If density averaging is needed. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. which discusses configuring analog outputs for density measurement. the primary variable (PV) analog output. HART Communicator or ProLink software.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. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY 6. Refer to the appropriate configurations manual. whereas. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level.

For frequencies less than 1 Hz. with 0. the meter does not require additional power input. The frequency output can be scaled from 0. avoid using a counter that will not accommodate at least a 5000 Hz input. The output is galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC.1 amp maximum sinking capability. A pull-up resistor provides an output impedance of 2. 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. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. some are limited to 5000 Hz or lower. terminal 15 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal 16 (RETURN) is the return line.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/PulseOutput 6 Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered.3 mm2) or larger. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). and be on (high voltage) for the remaining pulse duration. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). with a 1000 ohm load limit. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter.000 Hz. A schematic of the frequency output for the RFT9739 is shown in Figure 6-1a.3 Frequency/Pulse Output The frequency output from the meter is used primarily for batching and inventory measurement. the frequency output signal wiring must be 22 AWG (0. the RFT9739 can be modified to make it an “open collector” output. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. shielded cable. page 50.000 Hz input signal. 6. In this case only the SV output can be used. the output is no longer 50/50 duty cycle. with a 15V logic level square wave. and has out-of-range capability to 15. Although most devices accept a 10.000 Hz. The pulse will be off (OV) for 0. twisted-pair. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA. However. unloaded. terminal CN2-D24 (FREQ+) is the signal line and terminal CN2-D26 (RETURN) is the return.1 to 10. The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 49 . This is different from many turbine and PD meters. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.2 kohm at the 15 volt logic level. The output circuit is rated to 30 VDC. For best results. page 50. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. The square wave has a 50/50 duty cycle for frequencies greater than 1 Hz. as shown in the schematic in Figure 6-1b.5 sec. There is one frequency output available from the RFT9739. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. Interfacing to Frequency/Pulse Output The standard output is internally powered. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). which use an external power source from the prover counter. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). 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 output and the RFT9739 has been assigned an address other than 0 for multidrop communication. A variety of proving counters can be used to accumulate pulses. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA. Because the output is internally powered. To provide sufficient pulse resolution. Signal input requirements vary from one device to the next.

Resistance is added to decrease input voltage to pulse counting device. Decreased/limited voltage RFT9739 frequency schematic. RFT9739 standard frequency schematic. VF+ 15V 2.2 kohm Freq+ Pulse out VF+ VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 Figure 6-1b.2 kohm Freq+ Pulse out Add diode or resistor to limit or reduce output voltage VF Return RFT9739 terminals VF+ Freq+ Return Fieldmount 14 15 16 Rackmount CN2-Z26 CN2-D24 CN2-D26 VF+ 50 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Frequency/Pulse Output Figure 6-1a. VF+ 15V 2. RFT9739 open collector 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.

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

0. Use whatever time conversion is appropriate. because it is capable of being scaled to a user-selected value. (Eq.000 Hz. new frequency and flow rate settings must also be determined. the K-factor is calculated and stored in a register. 52 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0 and higher. but it can be overranged to 15. as shown in the following example: Frequency ( pulse/sec ) K–Factor = -------------------------------------------------------------. Input frequency restriction for the proving counter must be kept in mind when scaling the frequency output from the meter. the meter should be scaled to produce the greatest number of pulses allowable per unit of mass that flows through the sensor. If field adjustment of the K-factor is required the following procedure should be used: 1. 6-9) Frequency Setting Flow Rate Setting = ----------------------------------------------------.000 Hz. using Equation 6-8.* t K–Factor To provide the greatest amount of resolution. 6-8) Frequency Setting K–Factor = ------------------------------------------------------. For example. (Eq. open the Configure menu and choose Transmitter Outputs. go to the Detailed Setup menu.* 60 (sec/min) Flow Rate (lb/min) If the K-factor needs to be changed. which can be viewed with a HART Communicator or the ProLink program.000 Hz). as shown in Equation 6-9. • To view the K-factor using a HART Communicator. For RFT9712 transmitters and RFT9739 transmitters with software versions lower than 3.* t Flow Rate Setting where t = time units conversion factor The time units conversion factor will vary from one application to the next. Determine the maximum allowable frequency allowed by the pulse counting device (cannot exceed 10. • To view the K-factor using Prolink software. The time units conversion factor (t). The frequency output can be configured to produce a selected number of pulses for every unit of mass or volume that the meter measures. because there are 60 seconds per minute. Determine the maximum operating flow rate. When there is no flow. then select Frequency output. the frequency setting unit of measure is Hz (or pulses per second). The maximum scalable frequency output is 10. is 60. For RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3. select Config outputs. 2.6 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. Equation 6-8 can be rearranged to determine the appropriate frequency/flow rate settings for a desired K-factor setting. the Coriolis meter frequency output will be 0 Hz. the K-factor must be calculated by hand. therefore. and the flow rate setting is in flow units per minute.

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

the graph in Figure 6-3 illustrates how damping affects the reaction of the Coriolis meter to changes in flow rate. which is used to convert the meter’s digital flow rate signal to a frequency output. resulting from flow pulsations and fluid turbulence characteristics. The flow sensor is extremely responsive to the dynamics of the fluid flowing through the vibrating tubes. The user-specified RFT9739 damping value can be varied from 0 to 1638. the raw flow measurement signal from a Coriolis meter exhibits significant variation. This value is a filter coefficient. a value of 0.1 54 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . and deviations are accounted for and adjusted for in the next time interval. Using a damping value of less than 0. The RFT9739 employs a selective digital software filter to accomplish this. and any value over 0. The microprocessor keeps track of the number of pulses output versus the total in the register. are sensed by the meter and this information is reflected in the meter’s output signals. The purpose of this damping is to filter out flow noise or the effects of rapid changes in flow rate. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the input. the frequency output will lag the change in the digital flow rate by approximately 0.1 is generally not recommended because no filtering is applied.1 incorporates first order filtering. the response time characteristics of the meter can lead to problems with undersized in-line field provers. turbine meters and PD meters have significant inertia. In contrast. Therefore. damping is used to provide averaging of the signals over a longer time base before updating the digital values.8. The lower the tube frequency. In the graph in Figure 6-3. so their mechanical sensing elements tend to dampen out small scale fluctuations in flow. For process control applications.2 uses second order filtering. For an instantaneous change in flow rate. resulting in output signals that have inherent mechanical averaging. Localized flow fluctuations and flow noise.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 need to be output to correspond to the amount of fluid measured by the meter. the longer it will take for the digital values to be updated.6 Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information Table 6-1.0012 g/cc 150 157 130 87 87 55 ρ=0. For a better understanding of these concepts. the frequency output of the meter is a reflection of the total flow measured by the meter. the dotted line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. and is continually being adjusted to provide proper accounting of the total fluid flow through the meter. results in a slight lag between an update in the digital flow rate and an update in the frequency output. the solid line represents the actual flow rate. Typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies.1 seconds.4. it can lead to problems for some types of measurements. Effects of Damping on Proving Accuracy Although using damping is recommended for smoothing out the raw signal from the meter.8 g/cc 139 135 110 76 76 41 ρ=0. A damping value of 0 will result in no filtering being applied. Sensor Tube Frequency (Hz) Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 ρ=0. The signal processing circuitry. so internal microprocessor damping is available to average this signal over time and provide a more uniform output. without affecting overall measurement accuracy. The standard RFT9739 damping setting from the Micro Motion factory is 0. Basically. In particular.

8 damping factor. the meter is actually measuring correctly. the launched object introduces additional pressure drop.000. For the 0.Interfacing to Coriolis Meter Output Signals Additional Flow Measurement Information 6 damping factor. the meter responds quickly enough that its flow indication is the same as the actual flow rate throughout the entire pulse accumulation period. which results in a reduction in the flow rate through the piping system. Duration of the prover prerun.1 damping 0. because the meter will be indicating a higher flow rate than the actual flow rate during the beginning of the pulse accumulation period. which is a factor of the prover volume and the fluid flow rate during the prerun. At event 1. 2. which depends on the transmitter damping factor and the sensor tube frequency. In contrast. the meter indication is being adjusted to an incorrect value.1 damping factor. At event 3. In this example. The applied meter factor is in error. The danger of this scenario occurring depends primarily on two factors: 1. The time between events 2 and 3 is the pulse accumulation period.8 damping Flow rate Prerun Pulse accumulation Event 2 Event 1 Start pulse count Launch piston Poppet valve closed Event 3 Stop pulse count Poppet valve open Time (sec) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 55 . Event 2 is the first measurement detector switch. At event 2.1 damping factor (dotted line) and a 0.8 damping factor results in an over-registration of counts by the prover counter.8 damping factor (dashed line). However. pulses from the meter begin to be accumulated by the prover counter. Event 3 is the second measurement detector. This meter factor would then be applied to the meter indication to correct its output. Coriolis meter response during proving. The time between events 1 and 2 is the prover prerun. using the 0. and the dashed line illustrates the meter indication with a 0. For the example shown in Figure 6-3.8 damping value would result in the determination of a meter factor with a value less than 1. note the difference in flow indication between the meter with a 0. Figure 6-3. The overall meter measurement is not in error. Actual flow rate 0. Event 1 is the launching of the prover ball or the prover piston. but it takes the meter some time to make up for the discrepancy between the actual flow rate and the meter indication. pulse accumulation from the meter is halted. by applying it. The meter response time. a 0.

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

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

58 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

60 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

The more samples that are taken. They are not typically used with portable proving systems. These proving computers will initiate the proving run. and does not imply Micro Motion’s recommendation of the devices listed. automatically read pressures. accumulate the pulses from the meter.1 Proving Computer Many companies manufacture proving computers or flow computers. the more reliable the average density reading will be. which can be used to automate the proving process. One disadvantage of flow computers is that they are generally dedicated to a single meter or several meters and are used in conjunction with a stationary prover. temperatures and densities. by way of a density input. page 91. Features to look for in a proving computer are: • A computer that is capable of performing volume-to-mass proving calculations.7 • • • • • Proving Instrumentation Requirements When proving a Coriolis meter. Refer to Section 8. A computational device is required for a small volume prover to perform the pulse interpolation calculations. and produce reports that can be output to an appropriate printer. or a calculated density • A computer that has enough input ports to acquire all of the necessary temperature. • The ability to sample a number of density readings over the proving run and provide an average density. These features make proving computers the preferred method for proving. a digital signal. • The ability to bring in density from an external density meter as an input frequency. required for sufficient accuracy when proving with smaller volumes. Companies that manufacture small volume provers often also supply proving computers. or an analog signal. This list is not all-inclusive. 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. pressure. The main advantage of a proving computer is that it eliminates errors associated with using look-up tables and performing calculations by hand. page 251.4. density. and frequency measurements. Flow computer manufacturers also commonly provide a product with proving capability. calculate meter factors and repeatability. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 61 . 7. for more information about small volume provers. The computer inputs must be compatible with the instrumentation outputs.

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

Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. Experience with the specific process fluid will be necessary to establish requirements for pressure measurement precision.05 °C) is used when proving meters.2 bar). to correct for the thermal expansion of the prover steel. Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. the required temperature measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in temperature. It may also be necessary to correct for the influence of pressure variations on the density of the process fluid. In general. a pressure measurement accuracy of ±100 psi would be required.5 °F (±0. For determination of corrections for the thermal expansion of the process liquid at the prover (Ctlp). An RTD or similar device is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. It is commonly required that the pressure measurement be accurate to ±3 psi (±0.4 Pressure Measurement Device Pressure measurement is required for closedvessel volumetric tank provers and pipe provers. A heat conductive fluid is placed inside the thermowell to transfer heat to the RTD or thermometer. pressure variations have a much lower relative impact than temperature on both the prover steel and process fluid density. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for thermal expansion of steel at the prover (Ctsp) to less than ±0. to correct for the influence of pressure on the prover volume.5°F would be required.1°F (0. The requirements for temperature measurement precision will vary depending on which correction factors are being applied in the determination of the meter factor. Generally. A pressure transducer is required for use with a proving computer to allow automated proving calculations. 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.01%. A thermometer is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. The thermometer resolution should be no greater than ±0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 63 .Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7 7. The two most common pressure measurement devices used for proving are diaphragm pressure transducers and bourdon tube pressure gauges.01%.3 Temperature Measurement Device Temperature measurement is required for volumetric tank and pipe provers. a temperature measurement accuracy of ±2. a thermometer with a resolution of 0. A pressure gauge is generally used for manual provings with a conventional prover. Instrument calibrations should be checked on a routine basis — typically monthly or quarterly. 7. These devices generally use a thermowell inserted in the process fluid. For determination of corrections for the pressure effect on the process liquid at the prover (Cplp). Documentation should be available to verify that the instrument calibrations are current. the required pressure measurement precision will depend on how sensitive the fluid density is to changes in pressure.25 °C). Temperature measurement might also be required to correct for the influence of temperature variations on the density of the process fluid. To keep the uncertainty in the determination of the correction for pressure effect on steel at the prover (Cpsp) to less than ±0.

Of the methods described above.0005 g/cc. 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. and the on-line density determination devices are the most practical. which will be used specifically for density measurement. and can be monitored while the meter is being proved. or additional temperature and pressure corrections will be required.0001 g/cc for NiSpanC. Proper sampling practices are vital to ensure the sample is representative of the process fluid. (A Coriolis meter mounted at the prover.0005 g/cc for stainless steel. if the sample contains light-ends and is not properly sealed.5 Density Measurement Device If the meter is configured for mass measurement.0001 g/cc. • On-line density from a separate density meter mounted at the prover. 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. The following methods are available to determine the process fluid density: • Calculation of density from pressure and temperature measurements. • On-line density from the Coriolis meter. 64 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Accuracy depends on instrument accuracy and equation accuracy. can be used. this device will generally require a slipstream to be pulled from the process pipeline.) When performing on-line density measurements it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings. a means is required for determining the density of the product at the prover.0001 g/cc. However. When performing on-line density measurements. • Sample and laboratory density determination. This may create errors in the density determination. an on-line density meter made of NiSpanC.7 Proving Instrumentation Requirements Pressure Measurement Device 7. or some other sampling method. ±0. accurate to ±0. Because the product volume will change with changing temperature and pressure. It is difficult to obtain samples that will represent the actual fluid density during the proving runs. or some other sampling method.0005 g/cc. it is recommended that a density factor for the on-line device be determined by comparing the density readings to pycnometer readings.0001 g/cc. the calculation method for well defined products. • Hydrometer. and a volumetric prover is used. can be used. Hydrometers generally do not have sufficient accuracy to be used for mass to volume proving applications. which raises concerns about proper sampling technique. accurate to ±0. the light-ends will escape to the atmosphere and cause a deviation in the sample density from the true product density. The device being used for determining density should have an accuracy of at least ±0. accurate to ±0. For the highest precision. The hydrometer technique requires a fluid sample to be taken from the process pipeline. • Pycnometer. accurate to ±0. correction factors would then be required to correct the density back to the process conditions. accurate to ±0.001 g/cc. The on-line density devices have the advantages of providing a continuous output signal that represents the actual flowing density. In addition it may be difficult to maintain the sample at the same temperature and pressure as the process fluid in the pipeline. Also. with an accuracy of ±0. All of the other methods require taking a fluid sample and determining the density of the sample.

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

66 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

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

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

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

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

9 0.0016 1.052 0.094 0. If the scale were only being used to measure items of the same density as the metal weight. 8-2) ρ air 1 – ---------------- ρ weight Fb = ------------------------------ρ air 1 – -----------.0009 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.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). for determining the quantity of fluid measured by the meter.6 0. The displacement of fluid results in the fluid exerting an upward buoyant force on the object.0009 1. Table 8-2. the process fluid.0008 1. page 181 (Appendix B). The 100 lbs of water is subject to a much larger upward buoyant force than the 100 lb weight.7 1.0014 1. The difference is important when a product of different density is weighed.6 1.045 0.0005 1. resulting in the scale registering a lower reading for the water than its actual mass.060 0. For gravimetric proving.157 0.4 1. Essentially.8 1. Fb 1.0007 1. and the object displacing the air is either (1) the metal weight.065 0.071 0.0005 1. Correction % 0. Buoyancy correction factors. or (2) the process fluid being measured.0012 1.0006 1.185 0. (Eq.3 1.0005 1.5 1.135 0. The magnitude of this force is equal to the mass of the fluid that was displaced times the acceleration due to gravity at that location.9 1. Therefore.085 0. when calibrating the scale.0011 1. and the buoyant force is inherently calibrated out.056 0. ρ fluid Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 73 . and Table 8-2 presents calculated buoyancy correction values for a range of fluid densities at sea level. Return line must be isolated so as not to affect the scale reading The only instrumentation required is a display or pulse counting device. 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.048 0.0019 1.0006 1.119 0. the scale reading is adjusted to match the weight of the certified weights. Fluid Density g/cc 2.0023 at sea level.0007 1. Buoyancy Correction Buoyancy correction is necessary to account for the scale being calibrated with metal weights. (Eq.0 1. A 100 lb weight displaces a much smaller volume than 100 lbs of water. no correction would be required.7 0. but being used to measure a fluid with significantly different density than the weights.8 0.105 0. and the weights.072 0. the fluid being displaced is air. the buoyancy correction is a calculation that employs the ratios of the densities of air.5 Note: All values Buoyancy Correction Factor. The scale is calibrated with the metal weights.226 Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor for gravimetric proving is determined from Equation 8-1.2 1.1 1. Equation 8-2 is used to determine buoyancy.0 0. a buoyancy correction factor (Fb) is applied to the scale’s reading. when proving the Coriolis meter. To compensate for this effect. can be used for recording data and performing the gravimetric proving calculations.

This component will generally have less than ±0.01% over the entire calibration range. The uncertainty can be improved by increasing the batch size or improving the scale resolution. page 71. (Eq. The following calculation can be used to determine the appropriate batch size.030% The scale resolution is the predominant influence on the calculated uncertainty. they are calibrated against certified weights. as indicated in Table 8-1. If truck scales are used. It may be helpful to refer to Section 9.025% ) + ( ± 0. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical gravimetric prover. 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. Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty Gravimetric provers are a primary standard because. the total uncertainty can then be determined as follows: E = ( ± 0. The scale should agree with the calibration weights to within ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.* 100 Batch Size This component is minimized by increasing the size of the test batch. which are a fundamental measurement standard. over the range of weight used for calibration. Eprover cal = The uncertainty from the scale calibration is determined from the measured or accepted deviation between the scale reading and the weights. A batch size large enough to result in ±0.00025 Ebuoy = The uncertainty due to the buoyancy correction will depend on the accuracy of the densities used to determine the buoyancy correction factor.01%. Using Equation 8-3. page 125.01% ) + ( ± 0. 74 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .5.01% uncertainty. they may not have sufficient resolution to warrant the additional calculations required to correct for buoyancy. page 73. and can result in measurement errors of 0. Eprover res = The scale uncertainty due to resolution is determined from the following equation: Scale Resolution E prover res = -----------------------------------------------. for an overview of the uncertainty calculation.01% ) 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.025% or better accuracy should be the target. Total error is calculated using Equation 8-3. it can be seen that this factor is significant for products of densities less than 1.1% and greater.0 g/cc. Scale Resolution Batch Size = -----------------------------------------------0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Gravimetric Tank Proving From Table 8-2. This will have a noticeable impact in custody transfer applications.

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

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

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

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

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

The criteria for determining whether conditions at the prover and the meter are 80 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .* --------------------------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. these factors are not required. where BPV = Base prover volume Mmeter = Coriolis meter mass measurement The pressure correction Cpsp is required only for closed tank provers. however. most volumetric tank provers are calibrated against another reference volumetric tank standard. there is no specific recommendation available. Therefore. (Eq. page 178 (Appendix B). where Qmeter = Coriolis meter volume measurement The four liquid correction factors (Ctlp . which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure. Proving form B-3.5. which provides a common base for comparison.Cplp . 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.2 °F and 5 psig is required. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. and Cplm ) correct the actual measured volume to standard conditions. The uncertainty in the proving will depend on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. a larger tolerance is generally acceptable. If the temperature and pressure at the meter and prover are essentially the same. becomes a tertiary standard. a volumetric tank prover. against fluid mass and density. Ctlm . which is proved against a volumetric field-standard test measure using the waterdraw method. known as a volumetric field-standard test measure. 8-6) BPV * C tsp * C psp C tlp * C plp MFv = --------------------------------------------. can be used for recording data and performing the volumetric tank proving calculations. it may be helpful to refer to Section 9. page 168 (Appendix A). The volumetric field-standard test measure is normally calibrated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). For products such as LPG and NGL. page 125. For an overview of the uncertainty calculation. Pulse Output Configured for Volume The meter factor for volumetric tank proving is determined from Equation 8-6. Typically.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving (Eq. For products such as crude oil. it is commonly felt that an agreement of ±0. Proving form A-3. The following analysis represents the error associated with a typical volumetric tank prover.

(Eq. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. Using the values presented above. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0.4 Tank Provers.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3). and (2) Cpsp. An uncertainty of ±0.0125% ) + ( ± 0.04% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.005%.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.8 g/cc.0001 g/cc can be obtained. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4. At best. an uncertainty of ±0.03% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. Only the temperature correction is used in the analysis shown below. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-7) using Equation 8-8.01%. 8-8) Density Uncertainty (g/cc) E density (%) = ± ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. and should not exceed ±0.02% ) + ( ± 0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 81 .073%. Eprover res = The uncertainty due to the resolution of the graduations of the site gauge on the prover neck should not exceed ±0. page 63. (Eq.4.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.02%. * 100 Process Fluid Density (g/cc) where Esteel = Two steel correction factors may need to be applied: (1) Ctsp.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the volumetric tank prover should be within ±0. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Tank Proving 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-7. because the majority of volumetric tank provers are not closed pressure vessels.3 and 7. 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.

except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. bulging. (Eq. If the liquid correction factors are used. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. which introduces a degree of error. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. or the tables could be misapplied. these factors may not even be applied. For this analysis. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.02% ) + ( ± 0. which must be considered when performing a volumetric tank proving. page 81. Using the values presented above. page 80.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. From Equation 8-6.01%. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. page 80. are: • Ensuring the tank volume is not changed by dents. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. or internal deposits • Site gauge resolution versus tank volume • Batch duration versus ramp-up/ramp-down times • Consistent batch size from one test to the next • Evaporation of process fluid during the test run 82 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. as shown in Equation 8-6. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors.03% ) + ( ± 0. However. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. the overall proving uncertainty for an open tank prover is: E = ( ± 0. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure.01% ) + ( ± 0. 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 errors can be significant. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.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. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions might be required. All of the terms in Equation 8-9 are the same as those in Equation 8-7.01% ) + ( ± 0.039% Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. If the meter and prover are located close to one another.

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

for troubleshooting information. When the displacer reaches the first detector.) The sphere. When measuring process fluids that have poor lubricating properties. Only the fluid that remains in the prover has to be dealt with. causing a reduction in flow rate. with a very smooth surface. The detectors are typically mechanically actuated electrical switches. If the prover is portable. When a proving is initiated. 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. Most pipe provers are only designed to operate over a 10:1 flow rate range. it is likely the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. or “ball”. and is made of an elastomer compound. a displacing device is introduced into the U-shaped portion of the prover. The displacer is usually spherical in shape. the ball is launched from the receiver and the force of the fluid causes the ball to travel through the prover loop. Detectors are installed in the proving loop. During a proving run. Flow is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. as illustrated in Figure 8-6. This fluid may be pumped back into the main pipeline or drained out of the prover and handled in some other fashion. When the displacer reaches the second detector. it will generally have to be completely emptied of product after the meter proving is complete. The fluid in the ball is typically a water-glycol mixture. Depending on the type of proving system being used. Thus. it will generally stay full of fluid and there will be no fluid disposal concerns. and flow rate. 84 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Damping Factor Recommendation A volumetric proving system used for field applications employs a batching method. there may still be some fluid disposal concerns. a damping factor of 0.8 should be used. page 131. Another advantage of using a pipe prover is the fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. Any leakage past the ball results in measurement error. Therefore. but minimizes excessive friction. is hollow and is filled with fluid under pressure. Refer to Section 10. (In general. it resembles a bowling ball. for the same reasons that were discussed for gravimetric proving (page 78). which prevents it from freezing. at relatively low fluid velocities.3 Conventional Pipe Prover A conventional pipe prover generally consists of piping and piping fittings fabricated into a U-shape proving loop. The primary advantage of using a pipe prover is the measurements are performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. This provides a tight seal. 8. When a proving run is not being conducted. it causes the detector to trigger the pulse counter to stop accumulating pulses from the meter. friction may cause the prover ball to hesitate as it moves through the prover. temperature. the detector triggers a pulse counter — which is connected to the Coriolis meter — to begin accumulating pulses from the meter. the friction of the ball creates additional pressure drop.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover adequate repeatability when proved. the ball is held in a receiver trap. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. and the fluid flow forces the displacing device to move through the prover. If the prover is a stationary prover dedicated to a single product. However. resulting in an erratic flow rate during proving. 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. which expands so the ball’s external diameter is 2 to 4 percent larger than the internal diameter of the prover tubing.

2. the product temperature in the prover must be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. Conventional pipe prover. Flow Sensor Flow Block and bleed valve Transmitter Coriolis meter Pressure Temperature Four-way diverter valve Sphere Receiver traps Detector switches Proving counter Bi-directional prover If the meter is configured for volume measurement. A pressure measurement is also required for correcting for the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover. page 22. page 17. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. In addition. thermowell. and Section 3. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow • The following additional instrumentation is required: • Pulse counting device. • Conventional pipe prover. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. 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. the density of the fluid in the prover will need to be measured to determine the mass of the fluid in the prover and allow comparison to the meter mass measurement. Flow Connection valves Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 85 .Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Figure 8-6. prior to reading the following details about conventional pipe provers.1. If the meter is configured for mass measurement. page 86. 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. the meter volume measurement can be compared directly to the prover volume. The equations used are the same as those used for volumetric tank provers.

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

4. and (2) Cpsp.0001 g/cc can be obtained.02% of the volume between the detectors. The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7.03% (NIST Handbook 105-3).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. beginning on page 63.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices. and should not exceed ±0.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0. (Eq.02% ) + ( ± 0.041% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. page 81. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover.01%.01% ) + ( ± 0. The importance of density measurement precision is apparent from this analysis.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0. Per API MPMS 4. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-12) using Equation 88. The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover ball) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. an uncertainty of ±0. these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of a minimum of 10.01% ) + ( ± 0.8 g/cc.3 and 7. An uncertainty of ±0. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0.2 Conventional Pipe Provers. At best.01%. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 87 . Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp.000 pulses.0125% ) + 2* ( ± 0.005%. Eprover cal = Eprover res = Ecounter res= Edensity = Esteel = Using the values presented above.03% ) + ( ± 0. 8-12) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( E prover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E density ) + ( E steel ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0. or ±0.074%.

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. page 86. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. If the liquid correction factors are used. However.01% ) + 2* ( ±0. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. For this analysis. there is uncertainty associated with using the values from the tables in API MPMS Chapter 11. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±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. or the tables could be misapplied.01%. If the meter and prover are located close to one another.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.041% 88 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. 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. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. From Equation 8-11. All of the terms in Equation 8-13 are the same as those in Equation 8-12. page 86. page 87. these factors may not even be applied. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm. Using the values presented above. except the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. (Eq. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. which introduces a degree of error. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter.01% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-11.03% ) + ( ± 0.02% ) + ( ± 0. the overall proving uncertainty for a conventional pipe prover is: E = ( ± 0. the errors can be significant. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter.

Consequently. From a technical perspective.8. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. The problem is that launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate. (See Section 6. 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. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. For enough pulses to be accumulated. 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. the proving results will be in error. page 52). 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. If a detector switch is replaced.000 pulses from the meter. the proving run should last long enough to accumulate at least 10. Most provers are equipped with some means for checking valving leaks.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the ball and accumulating pulses from the meter. by employing a double block and bleed valve for diverting fluid from the main pipeline into the prover.3 (see K-Factor or Pulse Scaling Factor Determination. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter. 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.Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover 8 Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. because there will usually be severe measurement errors.01%. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. In bi-directional provers. The ball should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure there is no severe scratching or scoring of the prover ball. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. page 53. Leakage Past the Prover Ball or Valves Any leakage past the prover ball or through the prover diversion valves will result in measurement errors. as discussed in Section 6.000 pulses. The switches can become worn or damaged.4. 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. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. if there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. Failure of a detector switch is generally easy to diagnose. the meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly. To minimize such errors. a waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a prover detector switch. Unidirectional provers require a new waterdraw any time the detectors are removed. Leakage past the ball can be prevented by making sure the ball is properly filled to slightly exceed the internal diameter of the prover. 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 prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect.

then determine repeatability between the average meter 90 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . to minimize or eliminate these problems. If the meter’s frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate during the prerun period.).67 seconds.4 (see Number of Proving Passes/Runs. Launching the prover ball causes the flow rate through the prover to drop. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved.2 Conventional Pipe Provers for details on sizing the prover volume. Proving runs should not begin until the prover temperature has stabilized. page 101). its internal volume will change. they are a concern with on-the-fly field provers. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Conventional Pipe Prover recommended damping factor is 0. Number of Proving Runs No fewer than five proving runs should be performed. etc.025%). which is beneficial if the process fluid has poor lubricating properties. sources of the non-repeatability need to be evaluated. the problem generally lies with the prover. the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. which requires a prerun duration of at least 0. which requires knowledge about the operating flow rates. This technique is common for small volume provers and is discussed in detail in Section 8. where the prover may be relatively small. resulting in meter factor errors. Erosion or Corrosion of the Prover Any variation in the volume of the prover will impact the accuracy of the meter factor. Damping Factor Recommendation Although damping considerations are not significant for tank proving methods. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline. Teflon®. Routine recalibration of the prover will minimize these errors. the process fluid should be continuously circulated through the prover. 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. If the prover experiences erosion or corrosion. the maximum and minimum allowable velocities and the meter’s K-factor. Refer to API MPMS 4. It might be necessary to insulate the prover piping to minimize ambient influences. 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. Prover Size Recommendation Sizing a prover is a fairly involved task. Repeatability As stated previously. As the prover size is increased there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results.05% (±0. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. To expedite this process. An additional benefit of coatings is they can reduce the friction between the ball and the prover. it may be necessary to group individual proving runs and average them. In some instances. If the prover is subjected to harsh process fluids. the prover can be coated with suitable materials (such as epoxies. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. factors. If both meters yield the same type of performance. The response time of the meter frequency output depends on the damping factor set in the transmitter.1.

pulses from the meter being calibrated are Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 91 . If there is no change in the meter factor between the two different damping value. and reduces the time required for the prover displacer to traverse the prover volume. When the flag triggers the first measurement switch.67 seconds. sweeping out a volume of fluid.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. and eliminates the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. A diagram of a typical SVP. which requires a proving duration of at least 0. except it has a significantly smaller volume. When the prover is in the standby mode or not being operated. prerun times at the maximum rated flow of the prover can be as short as 0.2 seconds. When a proving pass is initiated. Using the lowest damping factor of 0. because the flow rate indication from the meter varies significantly. which has an optical “flag” mounted on it. a conventional pipe prover is large enough that the prerun will be 4 seconds long. Although the damping factor will have no affect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter.1 is usually quite conservative. and the prover prerun time is not known. is attached to the piston. the “flag” triggers optical measurement switches.1.8. Its small size makes the SVP particularly suitable for portable installations. it might be necessary to use a smaller damping factor. page 92. the poppet valve. The primary advantages of a small volume prover (SVP) are its small size and wide flow rate rangeability of 1000:1.8 can be used.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 The factory default setting is a 0. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. The meter should be proved first with the damping factor of 0. The volume of an SVP is on the order of 10 to 20 times smaller than a conventional pipe prover used for comparable service. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different factor. and additional timing computations are required to minimize resolution problems associated with accumulating fewer than 10.1. The damping factor should not be set any higher than 0. A metal rod. If poor repeatability is demonstrated. them proved again with the damping factor of 0. and a damping factor of 0. Key components are the prover cylinder and piston. and the optical detectors. An SVP is essentially the same as a pipe prover.4 Small Volume Prover The terms small volume prover and Compact Prover™ are often used interchangeably. The wide flow range allows one SVP to be used for calibrating multiple meters with significantly different flow ratings. the poppet valve is closed pneumatically and seals against the face of the piston. Because a 0. However.8. in this case a Brooks Compact Prover. many individuals do not like to use a low damping factor. The seals around the piston prevent leakage of fluid around the piston as it moves down the cylinder. the poppet valve is open and fluid flows freely through the piston assembly. Generally. If a damping value of 0. The flowing fluid pushes the piston downstream through the cylinder. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. 8.8 is preferred. As the piston sweeps through the cylinder volume. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. special precautions must be taken to ensure the validity of the proving results when using an SVP. is presented in Figure 8-7. which generally results in provings taking less time. However. Therefore.000 pulses from the meter. a simple test can be performed. creating a solid surface. the larger damping value is acceptable. Compact Prover is a trademarked name for the small volume prover manufactured by Brooks Instruments.8 damping factor.

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

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

page 177 (Appendix B). The meter mass is determined from the interpolated meter pulses. instead of the total meter pulses. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3. 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. as shown in Equation 8-16. Proving form B-2. which contains all of the required proving information.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover density measurement for each proving pass of an SVP may be sufficient if the passes are short enough in duration. not the individual proving passes. This form summarizes only the results of the proving runs.2. In addition. The product temperature in the prover must also be measured to correct the volume of the prover for thermal expansion of the prover steel. and the duration of the individual proving passes. prior to reading the following details about small volume provers. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. 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. page 22. page 17. consisting of (1) a pulse counting device. thermowell. (2) a high-resolution crystal oscillator (>100. The requirements for density averaging will obviously depend on the stability of the process fluid density. and pressure tap • Valving to divert flow The following additional instrumentation is required: • Proving electronics. A printer is required to produce the report.1. a pressure measurement is required for correcting the effect of pressure on the internal volume of the prover. and Section 3. (Eq. 94 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor is determined from Equation 8-15. The equations used are the same as those used for conventional pipe and volumetric tank provers. (Eq. 8-16) N interpolated M meter = ---------------------------K–Factor 2. shows the proving calculations for a small volume prover. and are applicable to all volumetric proving devices. 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: 1.000 Hz) for timing measurements. Most small volume provers are equipped with electronics that automatically generate a proving report.

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

the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP. Ecal ref = The total uncertainty of a NIST volumetric field-standard test measure should not exceed ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0. which corrects for the effect of pressure on the prover. 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.038% Performing the same analysis with a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. However.0001 g/cc can be obtained.0005 g/cc is fairly easy to obtain from a variety of devices.01% Edensity = The uncertainty due to the density determination depends on the precision of the density measurement device or density determination technique. and should not exceed ±0.005%.03% (NIST Handbook. 96 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Eprover res = The uncertainty due to errors in the displacer (prover piston) and detectors triggering at the same point should not exceed ±0. Eprover cal = Per API MPMS 4.01% ) + ( ± 0. and (2) Cpsp. Calculate the uncertainty in percentage terms (to be used in Equation 8-19) using Equation 88. If the temperature and pressure measurements follow the precision recommendations made in Sections 7. the overall proving uncertainty for a small volume prover is: E = ( ± 0. (Eq. Esteel Using the values presented above. page 81. = Two steel correction factors are applied: (1) Ctsp.01% of the volume between the detectors.0001 g/cc for a fluid with a density of 0.072%. which corrects for the effect of temperature on the prover. an uncertainty of ±0. At best. Ecounter res = The uncertainty due to the pulse counter and pulse interpolation calculations should not exceed ±0.0125% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. 105-3). these corrections will have a fairly insignificant impact on uncertainty.3 and 7.8 g/cc.01%. An uncertainty of ±0. the deviation from the waterdraw between the volumetric field-standard test measures and the pipe prover should be within ±0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-19.3 Small Volume Provers. and a density measurement uncertainty of ±0.4 on page 63.03% ) + ( ± 0.01% ) + ( ± 0.0005 g/cc would result in an overall uncertainty of E = ±0.

037% Although the uncertainty calculated for a small volume prover is less than for a conventional pipe prover. All of the terms in Equation 8-20 are the same as those in Equation 8-19.01% ) + ( ± 0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the prover and the meter. If the meter and prover are located close to one another.01% ) + ( ± 0. the uncertainty in applying the Ctl and Cpl factors will generally be insignificant. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure.01% ) + ( ± 0. the errors can be significant. This is due to the smaller prover volume. 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. the pass-to-pass proving results obtained from a small volume prover are typically not as repeatable. page 95.03% ) + ( ± 0. which inherently magnifies the effect of any deviations in the prover performance or meter performance during the proving pass. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult.005% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. the uncertainty value for the prover resolution is tighter for an SVP. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.01% ) + 2 * ( ± 0. 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. However. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 97 . page 96.01%. page 95. If the liquid correction factors are used. (Eq. Using the values presented above the overall proving uncertainty for an SVP is: E = ( ± 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.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. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. these factors may not even be applied. A density measurement is not needed for this case. However. which will introduces a degree of error. For this analysis. the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. except for the liquid correction term: Eliquid = There are four liquid correction factors that may need to be applied: (1) Ctlp and (2) Ctlm. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. or the tables could be misapplied. this calculation is identical to the one used for conventional provers. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. From Equation 8-17. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required as shown in Equation 8-17.

the clock frequency is 800.000 Hz. The actual proving time is at least 10 times greater than this value.25 microseconds.000 times greater than the reference period of the clock in order to provide sufficient accuracy. the time period required for pulse accumulation is only 0. One indication of leakage is poor repeatability. to improve lubricity.01%.000. so more frequent inspection for leaks is warranted. If the proving results seem inconsistent with previous results. to minimize variations in the flag position relative to the detector switches. Any leakage past the prover seals will result in measurement errors. which has a very low coefficient of thermal expansion. which corresponds to a period of 1. 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. The prover piston seals can be checked for leaks by blocking the prover in. Wear of the seals will be greater with process fluids that have poor lubricating qualities.025 seconds to obtain ±0. the piston seals are suspect. Therefore. It may be desirable to coat the walls of the proving cylinder with an appropriate epoxy-based compound or baked-on phenolic. launching the prover piston. If the number of pulses accumulated during a proving run is less than 1. the prime sources of uncertainty are the reference period of the clock and the time period used to accumulate pulses from the meter. 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. and probably require replacement. and applying sufficient actuator pressure. the proving repeatability will be 98 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . If a detector switch is replaced.01% resolution uncertainty. Even though pulse interpolation is used. the repeatability of the proving will be impacted by the number of pulses accumulated from the meter. Any misalignment between switches will result in measurement errors. the switches should be checked to make sure they have not become loose and shifted their position. Accumulating Enough Pulses From the uncertainty analysis performed in the previous section. For the Brooks Compact Prover. Because pulse interpolation is used. The typical optical detector switch is extremely precise. The flag is commonly mounted on a rod made of a steel. care must be taken to precisely install it without changing the prover volume. A waterdraw should be performed as soon as possible after replacing a detector switch. 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. If the rod that holds the measurement detectors moves more than the amount prescribed by the manufacturer. which must be considered when using a small volume prover. The time period for pulse accumulation must be at least 20.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Precautions Key items that impact the accuracy of the proving.

more passes per run are required. (See Section 6. This generates random vibration which is transmitted to the sensor flow tube and pickoff detectors. page 103. The response time of the meter frequency output will depend on the damping factor set in the transmitter. which requires a proving prerun of at least 0. The problem is that launching the prover piston causes the flow rate to change. Prover Plenum Pressure Some small volume provers use pressure to assist in closing the poppet valve to launch the prover piston. within the frequency constraints of the proving counter.8 g/cc 159 139 157 135 130 110 87 76 87 76 55 41 (Hz) ρ = 0. The prerun time must be long enough to ensure that the meter’s frequency output is reflecting the correct flow rate before the Table 8-3. piston reaches the first detector switch and the accumulation of pulses from the meter begins. launching the piston can create significant mechanical shock. when proving times are less than 5 seconds. page 53.4.0012 g/cc ρ = 0.998 g/cc 135 131 106 73 73 39 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 99 . Typical sensor operating frequencies. The prerun duration should be greater than 4 seconds to allow this damping factor to be used. The shorter the time period for launching the piston. which will transmit down the pipeline to the meter.1. This is because the number of internal Coriolis meter measurements is limited for short pass times.67 seconds in duration. If the meter frequency output has not settled to the correct flow rate. The more internal measurement samples made by the meter. a flow tube that vibrates at 80 Hz will result in 320 internal samples being taken per second. 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.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 somewhat worse. Sensor Model CMF025 CMF050 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Sensor/Tube Frequency ρ = 0. If the plenum pressure is set too high. Therefore. To further minimize pulse resolution errors.8. 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. The internal measurement sampling of the Coriolis meter is based on the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. Additional information is presented under Small Volume Prover Size Recommendations. The meter takes four internal ∆t samples for each vibration period. This in turn causes the voltage signals from the pickoffs to become “noisy”. The smallest recommended damping factor is 0. and the meter factor that is determined will be incorrect. a prerun time of 4 seconds or longer is not very common. the transmitter should be configured to produce the maximum number of pulses possible. but will make the meter less repeatable. A key point to consider is that the Coriolis meter measurement is time based. a lower damping factor will be required. the better the proving repeatability will be. page 100. the proving results will be in error.) The prerun time is the interval between launching the piston and accumulating pulses from the meter. However. and additional passes are required to externally accumulate more data from the Coriolis meter. Table 8-3 shows typical Coriolis meter operating frequencies. This does not affect the overall accuracy of the meter measurement. The factory-set default damping factor is 0. and Damping Factor Recommendations. Therefore. Since small volume provers have such short pass times. For an SVP. the less repeatable the meter measurement becomes.

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

five proving round trips. 8-22) Prover Volume (units) ≥ 0. Appendix B. gal (liters) 5 (20) 10 (40) 15 (60) 30 (120) 65 (250) 100 (400) 170 (650) Maximum flow rate. Method 3 in Appendix B. Repeatability is used as an indication of whether the meter and proving system are operating properly. By using a larger prover.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Thus.17 seconds. 8-21) Proving Flow Rate (units/minute ) ≤ 30 * Prover Volume (units) and for determining the minimum recommended SVP size (given the flow rate): (Eq. When using Equations 8-21 and 8-22 for sizing small volume provers for use with Coriolis meters. is most commonly used. there will generally be an improvement in the repeatability of the proving results. Table 8-4. but is also used to provide confidence in the proving results. Special methods for defining the required number of proving runs for SVPs have been developed and are presented in API MPMS 4. a proving run is generally a group of passes averaged together. page 101.3 Small Volume Provers. Number of Proving Passes/Runs Generally. are used to prove a meter with a conventional prover. The repeatability specification is used as the determinant in ensuring a sufficient number of proving runs are performed to provide the correct meter factor. the maximum recommended flow rate for a Brooks Compact prover is approximately four times less than the prover specification. which repeat within 0. 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. However. The prerun duration at the maximum flow rating of the Compact Prover is on the order of 0. but can be a single proving pass. It is recommended to use the largest size Compact Prover available when proving Coriolis meters. gpm (m³/h) 150 (35) 300 (70) 450 (105) 900 (210) 1940 (450) 3640 (850) 5075 (1150) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 101 .033 * Proving Flow Rate (units/minute) Note that “units” can be any volumetric unit of measure. Prover Description 8" 12" Midi 12" Std 18" 24" 34" 40" Volume.05%. for determining the maximum flow rate (given the SVP size): (Eq. To clarify terminology used in this discussion: a proving pass is equal to one complete trip of the prover piston. Table 8-4. Brooks Compact prover — maximum flow rate for Micro Motion meters. lists maximum flow rates for Brooks Compact Provers to provide compatibility to MMI Coriolis meters.

05% tolerance. For turbine and PD meters 5 runs of 3 passes each is most commonly used.9996 0. These data points represent the individual meter factors for each of the 100 prover passes.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover Method 3 (from API MPMS 4. how many proving passes are required for each run for Coriolis meters? The technique of grouping proving passes into runs. at 700 lb/min. using Equation 9-10.0004 1. The number of passes per run should not exceed 20. is illustrated in Figure 8-9. each consisting of a specified number of passes. Average meter factors for multiple proving runs. At least two runs are needed to calculate repeatability. The same procedure was used for the other sets of data producing: • • • • • 20 runs of 5 passes. Appendix B) Method 3 involves accumulating individual prover passes to form a group (run). The 100 prover passes were divided into 33 consecutive runs of three passes each.0006 Average meter factor 1. At the far left of the graph is the data for one pass per run. The repeatability of meter factors for all of the runs should then fall within the 0. page 124. Usually. are performed.05%. Coriolis Meter Number of Passes The question that remains is. This graph illustrates the results of performing 100 consecutive proving passes using a 12-inch (15-gallon) prover to prove a D300 sensor (with an RFT9712 transmitter).3. 10 runs of 10 passes. and then determine an average meter factor for the run. 5 runs of 20 passes.9998 0.9994 0. The meter factor repeatability between the runs is summarized in Table 8-5 (which presents the repeatability results calculated from the difference between the maximum and minimum meter factors. 6 runs of 15 passes. In the next set of data there are three passes in each run. Increasing the number of passes per run results in improved repeatability (D300/12” Compact Prover 700 lb/min). Increasing the number of passes in each group decreases the variation between the group meter factors.0002 1 0. The average of all of the runs then becomes the meter factor to be used for inventory calculation. using 10 passes per run results in a repeatability well within 0.9992 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 100 Passes per run 102 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . as described by Method 3. A series of runs. the number of proving passes required for each proving application will depend on a number of variables: Figure 8-9. However.0008 1. It can be seen that. Each data point is the average meter factor for the three passes. for this particular example. Meter factors are then determined for each run. 1. three or five runs are used. and 4 runs of 25 passes.

If both meters yield the same type of performance.1 reduces the possibility of problems with a prerun that is too short. Repeatability As stated previously.05% (±0.052 0.064 0. One way of identifying prover problems is to use redundant metering in the pipeline.016 evaluated. When using an SVP.13 0. even with 20 passes per prover run. At flow rates of 50% or less of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate.1 is recommended. 3 to 5 passes per run will usually be acceptable. sources of the non-repeatability need to be Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 103 . damping concerns are far more important for an SVP than for a conventional pipe prover. page 245.4. and in detail in Section 6. the general repeatability criteria is a total range of 0. If this repeatability specification cannot be met. Repeatability versus number of passes per run. Due to the small size of an SVP and the subsequent reduction in the proving prerun time. page 53. the problem generally lies with the prover.023 0. This method requires an initial group of 30 proving runs of 1 pass each to be conducted. Passes per Run 1 3 5 10 15 20 25 Repeatability (%) 0. • • • • • Coriolis meter size Prover size Flow rate Variation in fluid density Coriolis meter damping factor It has been found that 3 runs of 10 passes each will generally provide the best results when proving Coriolis meters.021 0. If one of the meters exhibits adequate repeatability when proved. 15 to 20 passes per run may be required.025%).033 0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Small Volume Prover 8 Table 8-5. An equation is then used to calculate the number of passes needed. At flow rates of 75% or greater of the meter’s maximum rate flow rate. based on the meter factors obtained from the 30 proving runs Damping Factor Recommendations Damping considerations were discussed earlier in this section (pages 99 and 100). Results from Figure 8-9. An alternative method for determining the number of passes required for a particular metering application is presented in Appendix I. a damping factor of 0. Using the damping factor of 0. it is likely that the poor repeatability is due to a problem with the other meter. 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.

then moved to the site where it will be used to calibrate the meter being tested.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. Although the damping factor will have no effect on the long-term inventory reading of the meter. master meter proving is only used when no direct proving methods are practical. to use a damping value of 0. The transfer standard is used as a means to pass along the prover’s calibration to the Coriolis meter being tested. For example. A damping factor larger than 0. 8.8 damping factor will need to be reassessed. The proving results are subject to the accuracy of the master meter and the influence of process conditions on the master meter.8. The key point concerning transfer standard proving is that the meter factor for the transfer standard is determined under actual operating conditions for flow rate. It is generally considered to be poor practice to make adjustments to a meter’s configuration settings once the meter has been proved. 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. The primary disadvantage of using a master meter is that it is an indirect proving method. In general. to determine a meter factor for the transfer standard meter.1. a master meter is generally proved in one location. inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved. The only exception is when correcting the meter’s measurement outputs using the meter factor results from the proving. over the exact same time interval. the meter should first be proved with a damping factor of 0. or for an oversized prover. temperature. and the Coriolis meter cannot be directly proved by the prover.8 instead of 0. To use a large damping factor.67 seconds. a larger damping factor is only acceptable for relatively low flow rates. a simple test can be performed. then proved again with a damping factor of 0. it is not recommended to prove the meter with one damping factor and operate it with a different damping factor. One of the drawbacks of master meter proving is. and their calibration usually does not reflect meter performance under actual operating conditions. Transfer standard meters are used to prove Coriolis meters in applications for which the prover is undersized for the meter. Transfer Standard Meters Transfer standard meters must initially be proved at operating conditions against either a conventional pipe prover or small volume prover. Master meters are generally calibrated in a laboratory environment. the proving application will have to be evaluated to determine if a larger damping factor can be used. or cannot be installed for logistical reasons. The test duration will generally be one minute or longer. The meter factor that is determined for the transfer standard meter removes any inaccuracies associated with the transfer standard meter.8 should never be used. Due to uncertainties in the master meter performance. Dual pulse counters and a precision triggering system are required. Any 104 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .1. Master meters are typically used in situations where provers are not available.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. Master Meters There is a distinction between master meters and transfer standard meters. Therefore. the larger damping value is acceptable. If the flow rate is increased the 0. Transfer standard proving may be necessary when using an SVP. and the prerun time is less than 0. If there is no change in the meter factor. pressure. and fluid composition.

For the rest of this discussion. for an overview of the applicable proving procedures. To prevent slippage. In this example. which can be moved from one location to the next. such as accumulating 10. the term master meter will be used to describe both transfer standard meters and master meters. This technique eliminates the uncertainty associated with proving the meter at one location and moving to a different site. it is always preferable to prove the Coriolis meter directly against the prover. Flow Sensor Block and bleed valve Turbine meter Transmitter Coriolis test meter Compact prover Counter 1 Gate Counter 2 Gate Start/ stop circuit Two-channel pulse counter Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 105 . Proving Equipment and Procedures The equipment and procedures for master meter proving are essentially the same as for transfer standard proving.000 Figure 8-10. A positive displacement meter is a direct volume measurement device. Minimum pulse requirements.Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards 8 A transfer standard proving is illustrated in Figure 8-10. a transfer standard meter is proved against an SVP to determine a meter factor. Transfer standard proving with volumetric master meter. Turbine meters are velocity measurement devices. The master meter must be proved in the same fashion as any meter. The volumetric meters that are used as master meters are positive displacement meters and turbine meters. and is then immediately used to prove the Coriolis meter under test. a flow conditioner should be used upstream of the turbine in both locations. 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. the fluid viscosity and the operating flow rate must be the same when the master meter is proved and when the master meter is used to prove the meter under test. except that a conventional or small volume prover must be used with the transfer standard meter. volumetric flow rate is determined from the fluid velocity.3. page 30. Turbine meters are primarily affected by variations in flow profile. Refer to Section 3. However. which will impact the accuracy of the meter. The primary concern for positive displacement meters is slippage. The flow conditioner and turbine meter should be fabricated into an integral meter section. fluid viscosity and flow rate.

(However. as is required for provers and tank standards. because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. the fluid contained within the prover must be returned to the pipeline or be disposed of in some manner. The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques. It might be useful to review the general proving discussion in Section 3.01% must be obtained. so no additional temperature or pressure measurements are required to correct for thermal or pressure expansion of the steel. which cover specific details about master meter proving. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. 106 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . Required Equipment The following proving equipment is required for master meter proving: • Master meter • Valving to divert flow • Prover (needed only when performing transfer standard proving) The following additional instrumentation is required: • Dual pulse counting device. longer proving times will improve the results.) If the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. When a conventional prover is used. Also. at least two consecutive proving runs that agree to within ±0. Therefore. If the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement. and flow rate. The volume of fluid contained in the metering section is minimal. if the master meter is used as a transfer standard meter in conjunction with a conventional pipe prover or SVP. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. 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. temperature. The master meter measures actual volume. temperature and pressure indications are useful in ensuring that process conditions are stable. and might be required to correct to the same reference conditions if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). must be met. page 30. • Density measurement device or density calculation from process conditions (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for mass measurement). • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. the Coriolis meter’s measured volume can be compared directly to the master meter’s volume measurement.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Volumetric Master Meters and Transfer Standards pulses for a conventional pipe prover. the uncertainty from the master meter is not the accuracy specification for the master meter. However. but the repeatability of the master meter proving results. The uncertainty associated with the master meter is minimized by proving the meter. to allow comparison to the Coriolis meter mass measurement. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer. prior to reading the following sections. and (2) when the proving is initiated.3. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal. There are two primary advantages to master meter proving: (1) the duration of the proving can be any length of time. The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in a ±0.

**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

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

An external density measurement is not required. a meter factor for the master meter is generally not used. and the process conditions at the two meters are sufficiently different to warrant liquid temperature and pressure corrections). Other advantages for master meter proving are the same as for other in-line proving techniques. The volume of fluid contained in the master meter piping is minimal. The flow rate is not stopped and started as it is with tank proving methods. Meter Factor Calculation The meter factor equation depends on whether the meter is configured for mass or volume measurement. Since Coriolis meters are very linear-flow measurement devices. (Eq. concerns about evaporation of product during proving are eliminated. temperature. can be used for recording data and performing the proving calculations for a Coriolis master meter. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for volume measurement. and flow rate. longer proving times will improve the results. the master meter is calibrated to provide an extremely linear output. Pulse Output Configured for Mass The mass meter factor for master meter proving is determined from Equation 8-27.01% pulse resolution uncertainty from either the Coriolis master meter or the Coriolis test meter. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 113 . Although temperature and pressure measurements are not required for calculation purposes. If the Coriolis test meter’s pulse output is configured for mass measurement.0000 as possible. Coriolis meters can measure both mass and volume. corresponding as closely to a meter factor of 1. to determine the quantity of fluid measured by both the master meter and the Coriolis meter. • Temperature and pressure measurements at both the test meter and the master meter (required only if the Coriolis meter is configured for volume measurement. page 180 (Appendix B).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. 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. The proving is performed under actual operating conditions of pressure. Proving form B-5. To reduce the meter’s uncertainty. there is no change in flow rate caused by launching a prover displacer. because fluid is not diverted out of the pipeline. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for mass measurement. (2) When the proving is initiated. individual meter factors can be determined at different flow rates. The proving duration can be no shorter than will result in ±0. the Coriolis master meter’s pulse output can also be configured for volume measurement. 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. This device should have the capability to be manually triggered with a push button. these process measurements are useful in ensuring stable conditions at both the test meter and the master meter. Also. which reduces concerns about fluid disposal. Instead.

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

01%. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. In order to meet this recommendation. At least 10.108% The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods. However. for master meter zero consideration.01% ) + ( ± 0. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. Eprover cal = The uncertainty due to this component will be very subjective. From Gravimetric Proving Uncertainty. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the master meter’s mass flow measurement. page 74. and is determined by how closely the master meter agrees with the gravimetric prover when it is calibrated. These meter factors should be documented and applied properly when proving meters in the field with the master meter. The uncertainty due to the pulse counter is ±1 pulse out of minimum of 10. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. a value of ±0. (Eq.030% could typically be expected.) The overall proving uncertainty when using a Coriolis master meter would be on the order of: E = ( ± 0. as explained previously. this can be improved by improving the ratio of scale resolution to proving batch size.000 pulses. or ±0. Eprover res = This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the master meter. The value of ±0. or ±0.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Mass Measurement The proving uncertainty in using a Coriolis master meter to prove the Coriolis test meter’s mass measurement is determined from Equation 8-29.10% is only applicable in the meter’s upper flow range. The meter’s zero stability must be taken into account. The master meter should be repeatable to within ±0. page 202.10% is used. For ELITE meters.000 pulses. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 115 . (Refer to Section E.000 pulses must be accumulated from the master meter.10% ) 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0.9. different meter factors may have to be used for different flow rates. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. A minimum of two runs should be conducted at each flow rate when calibrating the master meter.01%. Ecounter res= This uncertainty component comes from the number of pulses accumulated from the test meter. 8-29) E = ( E cal ref ) + ( Eprover cal ) + ( E prover res ) + ( E counter res ) + ( E master ) 2 2 2 2 2 where Ecal ref = The uncertainty of the calibration reference is the uncertainty of the gravimetric prover. and impact on uncertainty.025 ) + ( ± 0.030% ) + ( ± 0. other than as a transfer standard. a value of ±0.01% ) + ( ± 0.025% for all of the proving runs conducted.

the overall proving uncertainty is: E = ( ± 0.8 Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter Uncertainty When Proving the Meter’s Volume Measurement The proving uncertainty for this case is determined from Equation 8-30. page 114. page 114.9. page 202. 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. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid pressure between the Coriolis master meter and the Coriolis test meter. page 81. Equation 8-8. For a fluid with a density of 0.01%. these factors may not even be applied. Using the values presented above. If the meters are located close to one another.) For ELITE meters. 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. is used. All of the terms in Equation 8-30 are the same as those in Equation 8-29. (Eq. This ratio tends to minimize the impact of errors in determining the exact values of the liquid correction factors. From Equation 8-28. the errors can be significant.118% ) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ± 0. or the tables could be misapplied. For fairly stable products such as crude oil. Characterizing the uncertainty associated with these liquid correction factors is difficult. it can be seen that the liquid correction factors are applied by taking the ratio of the prover values divided by the meter values. The ELITE meter density uncertainty is ±0. However. If the liquid correction factors are used. which introduces a degree of error. since both of these measurements are used to provide the volume measurement.1% is used for the mass measurement component. 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. for master meter zero considerations and impact on uncertainty. page 115.0005 g/cc.01% ) + ( ± 0. a value of ±0.126% 116 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .025 ) + ( ± 0. Emaster = This uncertainty component comes from the uncertainty in the Coriolis master meter’s mass flow measurement and density measurement.01% ) + ( ± 0.118%. (Refer to Section E. For the density uncertainty. The fluid being measured might not be well characterized by the table values.8 g/cc. For fluids that are greatly affected by changes in temperature and pressure. 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.0625%. as shown in meter factor Equation 8-28. For this analysis the uncertainty associated with these correction factors will be assumed to be ±0. which correct for the effect of differences in fluid temperature between the prover and the meter. and (3) Cplp and (4) Cplm.01% ) + ( ± 0.030% ) + ( ± 0. The accuracy of the instrumentation used to perform the temperature and pressure measurements will also affect the accuracy of the factors. liquid correction factors for correcting the prover volume and meter volume to the same conditions may be required. this equates to an uncertainty of ±0.

Recommended Proving Duration A proving time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. it is usually quite easy to collect Number of Proving Runs No fewer than three proving runs should be performed. This may not be possible. For enough pulses to be accumulated. the test meter’s frequency output must be scaled properly.000 pulses from a Coriolis meter may not be sufficient to ensure that the proving results are repeatable. Because the frequency output of the meter is scaleable. which must be considered when using a Coriolis master meter. the resulting error to the overall measurement will be no more than ±0. If a volumetric master meter were used in the same fashion. Appendix G. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 117 . and Appendix H. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. 10.01%. and appropriate compensations for variations in process conditions be used. and the proving duration must be long enough to allow a sufficient number of pulses to be accumulated. When using a master meter. discusses volume. If there is a ±1 pulse accumulation error during the proving. In order to track the impact of process conditions on the performance of the master meter.3.000 pulses must be accumulated from both the master meter and the test meter during the proving run. page 49. the process temperature and pressure at the master meter should be monitored. To minimize errors in pulse accumulation. Any inaccuracies in the master meter’s measurement will be passed on to the meter being proved.000 Hz output. Because the frequency output can be scaled to a maximum 10. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. it is important that the master meter performance be well characterized.000 pulses. depending on the facilities available to prove the Coriolis master meter. Long run times (greater than 5 minutes) are not recommended. A proving run time of 1 to 2 minutes is recommended. discusses density.000 pulses.Flow Rate Proving Devices Coriolis Master Meter 8 The uncertainty shown is higher than with the other proving methods. other than as a transfer standard. because of the larger meter uncertainty component. provides a discussion on influences on the Coriolis meter’s mass measurements. it is usually quite easy to set up the transmitter to produce more than 10. the uncertainty would be as great as or greater than was calculated above. a minimum of 10. If the master meter cannot be proved under normal operating conditions. even on proving runs of very short duration. Collecting 10. Appendix F. Accumulating Enough Pulses Maximizing the number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run will minimize errors due to incorrect pulse accumulation. page 239. Proving Duration for Repeatable Output The proving duration must be long enough to provide a repeatable output from the Coriolis meter. because process conditions will be more likely to change over long times. 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. the proving should never be less than one minute in duration. Precautions Key items that will impact the accuracy of the proving. An advantage of master meter proving is the fact that the proving time can be set to any desired value. The proving duration should be no shorter than one minute when performing master meter proving. page 223. as discussed in Section 6. page 205.

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

. . . . . . . . . . Alternate Method for Determining Mass Meter Factor . . . . . . . .7 Figure 9-1 Table 9-1 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 119 . . . . . . . How Many Proving Runs Are Required? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 9. . .0. . . . . . . Modifying K-Factor is not Recommended . . . . . . . . . . . RFT9739 with Software Version 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stability of Process Conditions . Trend Chart Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 or Higher . . . . . . . Mass Meter Factor . . . . .9 Proving Calculations Summary 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Trend Chart . . Repeatability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Factor Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 9.4 Volume Meter Factor . . . . . . . . .2 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reproducibility and Trend Charting . . . . .3 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meter Configured for Volume. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 122 123 123 123 123 124 124 125 125 126 128 128 129 129 127 128 9. . . . . . . . . RFT9712 and RFT9739 with Software Version Lower Than 3. . . . . . . . .1 9. . . . . . . .

120 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

Meter Configured for Volume The API recommended equation for calculating repeatability is: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 123 . A batch totalizer computes and displays the total Coriolis meter mass instead of the number of pulses accumulated. which provides proper accounting of the inventory being measured. which determines the total number of pulses output by the meter during the proving run. An alternative is to prove the Coriolis meter’s volume and density measurements and calculate the mass meter factors from the following equation: (Eq. 9.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. page 29.4 Repeatability The objective of proving a flowmeter is to obtain a meter factor. 9-8) MFm= MFv * DF where MFm= mass meter factor MFv = volume meter factor DF = density factor For additional details about this proving approach. The repeatability is used as an indication of whether the proving results are valid. The number of proving runs required for each proving method are discussed in detail in Section 8. This value can then be entered directly into Equations 9-4 and 9-5. This value is based on experience with turbine and PD meters proved with conventional pipe provers. The general criterion used when proving flowmeters is that the repeatability of the proving results be within 0. (Eq. the prover. 9-7) C oriolis Meter Pulse M meter = -----------------------------------------------------------K–Factor Instructions for determining the meter’s K-factor are given in Section 6. For small volume provers 3 or 5 runs of 10 passes each is recommended. Too much variability could be an indication that there is something wrong with the meter.05%. to provide some level of confidence in the proving results. refer to Proving in Volume Units/Measuring in Mass Units. or some other component in the proving system. page 49.3 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. Typically.05% often indicates these meters require maintenance. When performing provings against tank provers. 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). at least five proving runs are performed. 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.3. 9. a batch totalizing device can be used. A repeatability value that exceeds 0.

it is typically required that the process conditions (temperature. Variations in temperature will change the thermal expansion of the prover. additional precautions are necessary. However. it should be fluctuating around an average value. If there is any variation.5 to 1°F. meter measuring mass and prover measuring volume). (Eq. and the maximum and minimum number of accumulated pulses from all of the proving runs are used in Equation 9-9 to determine the repeatability. both measure volume).100 Pulses MIN A series of proving runs are conducted. A density variation of 0.0005 g/cc will consume the general repeatability specification of 0. 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. Equation 9-10 must also be used when performing tank proving and master meter proving. If the meter and prover measure in different units (for example. pressure. Products such as light hydrocarbons are unpredictable because they exhibit significant variations in density with 124 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the repeatability calculation must be based on the calculated meter factor. If the product density varies during a series of proving runs. This can lead to calculating a repeatability value greater than could be attributed to the meter.05%. these variables should not be trending upward or downward. the proving results will exhibit poor repeatability that is not attributable to the flowmeter. as shown in Equation 9-10. any variations in product density that might occur during proving would not be taken into account. which affects the calculated prover volume. 9-10) MFMAX – MF MIN Repeatability (%) = ----------------------------------------.9 Proving Calculations Summary Repeatability (Eq. The prover must be allowed to stabilize to the process fluid temperature prior to starting the actual proving runs. and pressure variations of 1 to 5 psig around an average value are usually acceptable. because the volume or mass may not remain constant from one run to the next. Temperature variations of 0. Specific recommendations for process condition stability are not generally available.* 100 MFMIN where MF = Meter factor If the repeatability calculation were based on the accumulated pulses instead of the meter factor. because the effect of varying process temperature and pressure on fluid density depends on the type of fluid being measured. in an actual field application it is often difficult to maintain stable process conditions. Stability of Process Conditions When proving a flowmeter. and density) remain stable. A rule of thumb is to monitor the temperature and pressure during the proving runs. 9-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN -* Repeatability (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------. When performing provings in which the meter is configured for mass measurement and the prover is a volumetric device.

the proving system. and the fluid properties should all be checked to verify the entire system is stable and functioning properly. Therefore.05%. 9-11) Zero Stability Repeatability (%) = 0.05 + -----------------------------------.05% repeatability specification. it is recommended that a density sampling method be implemented to provide an average density for each proving run. The 0.05% may be an indication of whether a turbine or PD meter is functioning properly. A density variation of 0.5 Meter Factor Uncertainty The meter factor calculated as a result of the proving can only be as accurate as the proving devices. a Coriolis meter that is functioning properly and is within the manufacturer’s specification would be considered to be unacceptable based on the 0. but it may require using proving runs with a greater quantity of fluid than would be used for a turbine meter. Repeatability Specification for Coriolis Meters Although a repeatability of 0. and determining the sensitivity of the measurement to the individual error sources. If density cannot be maintained within 0.0002 g/cc. For each error source. Other difficult applications involve products with changing composition. the uncertainty is multiplied by a calculated sensitivity coefficient.05%. The total uncertainty is based on the contributions of the following components: Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 125 . If the repeatability of a proving is greater than the usual repeatability.* 100 2*(FlowRate) The base repeatability is ±0. “Measurement of fluid flow—Estimation of uncertainty of a flow-rate measurement. Alternatively. such as crude oil/water mixtures. pipe prover or small volume prover.Proving Calculations Summary Meter Factor Uncertainty 9 changing temperature and pressure.” This method of determining uncertainty involves identifying all of the sources of error. it does not necessarily indicate the same for a Coriolis meter. The total uncertainty is determined by performing a square root of the sum of the squares calculation on all of the error components. This is twice the common proving guideline of 0. A Coriolis meter is functioning properly if it is operating within its normal repeatability specification. Additional proving runs are recommended to improve confidence in the data. (Eq. This may require increasing the size of a tank prover. A common method used to determine uncertainty is presented in ISO standard 5168.05% repeatability specification. If density cannot be maintained during the proving. as shown in Equation 9-12. then the Coriolis meter.05% repeatability specification can generally be achieved with a Coriolis meter. the repeatability limits may need to be increased. There will always be some degree of uncertainty associated with the proving results. the repeatability specification for ELITE sensors is presented in Equation 9-11. For example. 9. which is a total range of 0.1%.0002 g/cc will consume a significant portion of the 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.

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. Understanding the uncertainty associated with the proving method is important for determining the applicability of the meter factor.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving. if needed • Any uncertainty associated with additional correction factors used for determining the meter factor (Eq. and fluid properties will also have a significant impact. The reproducibility requirements will be governed by Weights and Measures requirements or contract requirements. in service where the process fluid conditions remain relatively constant. This concept is explained in more detail in Section 9. the meter factor from the current proving should be within ±0. and will vary somewhat from one proving system to the next. If the variation in meter factors from one proving to the next is within the overall uncertainty of the meter factor determination.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. then the meter factor should not be changed. The proving equipment. The value that is determined is dependent on the characteristics of the individual proving system. For many pipeline applications. if used • Any uncertainty in the density determination. The proving reproducibility does not depend solely upon the performance of the meter.6 Reproducibility and Trend Charting Reproducibility is the ability of a meter/prover system to reproduce results over a long period of time.6. proving method. 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. 126 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 9.9 Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting • The uncertainty inherent in the device used for calibrating the prover • The uncertainty tolerance for agreement of the prover with the calibration device • Any uncertainty inherent in the resolution of the proving device • Any uncertainty associated with counting pulses. the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are ±0. The reproducibility will ultimately be established from experience with each individual proving system. Uncertainties for each proving method are presented in Section 8.

25% — that is. page 189. In addition to the acceptance limits. If the meter factor varies from one proving to the next.0009 MF = 1. Whenever the meter factor is changed. which is defined to be ±0.035% 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 . the generally accepted limits for meter factor reproducibility are 0. indicate that it might be necessary to perform provings more often.995 1-Jun MF = 1. Alternatively.0005 MF = 1. Acceptable Meter Factor Range Is Determined From First Meter Factor. as illustrated in Figure 9-1. Figure 9-1. Trend charting of meter factors will be valuable in analyzing the reproducibility of the meter and determining the required frequency of proving. 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. which exceed the user-defined limits. as discussed in the previous section. and acceptance limits at +0.001 MF = 1.035%.004 1. Uncertainties for each proving method are detailed in Section 8. the uncertainty of the proving method should also be included on the trend chart (represented in Figure 9-1 as dashed lines). includes a trend chart for tracking the Coriolis meter’s meter factors over multiple provings. A New Meter Factor Is Determined.Proving Calculations Summary Reproducibility and Trend Charting 9 A change in the meter 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. the meter factor from the current proving should be within 0. From this example it can be seen that the meter factor used for accounting would only be changed when the meter factor determined from proving exceeded the uncertainty limits of the proving. which are plotted in Figure 9-1. it is not necessarily appropriate to apply a new meter factor to the Coriolis meter’s reading. 1. When A New Meter Factor Falls Outside The Established Meter Factor Uncertainty Limits. held once per month.005 1. The proving uncertainty should be used as the criterion for determining when to change the value being used for the meter factor. Appendix D.996 0.002 1. new uncertainty limits would need to be recalculated to determine when it would be necessary to change the meter factor again. Table 9-1.25% and –0. contains hypothetical meter factors for 11 provings.25% 1. And New Limits Are Established.003 Meter factor (MF) Acceptable meter factor range ±0.998 0.25% of the centerline.0013 Uncertainty of proving method ±0. Variations in the meter factor from proving to proving. the limits can be set around the average meter factor from a sequence of periodic provings. The trend chart should be developed with the meter factor of the first proving as the centerline. page 128.999 0.997 0. Meter Factor Trend Chart.001 1 0. For many pipeline applications.25% of the meter factor from the previous proving.

00165 — — Although this method is technically correct.0015 1.0007 1.0013 Leave MF=1.0005 Leave MF=1. The meter factor that is determined during proving is entered into the appropriate register.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations Table 9-1.0005 1.0 or Higher Meter factor registers have been added to RFT9739 transmitters with software versions 3.0013 Leave MF=1. These registers allow the results of a proving to be input directly into the transmitter’s memory.0011 1. RFT9739 with Software Version 3.001 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. (Eq.001 Leave MF=1.0009 Leave MF=1.0005 Leave MF=1.0005 Change MF=1.00055 to 1. The values in these registers correct the meter’s measurements as shown in Equation 9-14.0009 Change MF=1. without having to modify the factory calibration factors.0012 1.0013 1.00125 — 1.00095 to 1. (Eq. 128 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0009 1.0013 New uncertainty limits (Uncertainty = ±0. or use an external device to correct the meter’s measurement. and density factor (DF). it does not provide an indication of the reliability of the proving technique.0007 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. and often results in the meter factor being changed unnecessarily.00085 — — 1. which eliminates the need for determining the uncertainty of the proving method and developing uncertainty limits.0014 Action Use MF=1. the meter’s inventory will be determined from Equation 9-13.001 1. 9-14) Corrected Measurement = MF * Uncorrected Measurement Three factors are available: mass meter factor (MFm). 9.0006 1. volume meter factor (MFv).001 Change MF=1. The meter factor value used in this equation is the average meter factor from a number of proving runs.7 Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations In general.00065 to 1. many users prefer to determine a new meter factor every time the meter is proved.0 and higher.00135 — — 1.035%) Determined to be 1. Data Are Charted In The Graph Shown In Figure 9-1. Trend Chart Data. However.00015 to 1.

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

If there are Weights and Measures certifications associated with the meter. 130 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . as described in Section 9.9 Proving Calculations Summary Applying the Meter Factor to Inventory Calculations (Eq.6. If this method is adopted. security restrictions on the meter would need to be broken to accomplish this. page 126). 9-17) FlowCalnew = FlowCal current * MFproving where FlowCalcurrent = Flow calibration factor currently configured in the transmitter One of the drawbacks of this approach is that coefficients within the meter are being modified. it is important that a trend chart be developed for varying flow calibration factors (instead of meter factors.

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

132 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

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

• 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. • 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. Entrained gas affects both the prover repeatability and the meter repeatability. Meter configuration should always be checked to make sure it has not changed from one proving to the next. make sure the prover ball is properly filled to provide a good seal. Ensure the ball is compatible with the process fluid. Variations in the process fluid Some suggestions for handling repeatability problems are offered below. • Make sure the prover is appropriately sized. • Crosstalk (vibration influences between Coriolis sensors) may be an issue if multiple Coriolis sensors are installed in the same pipeline. The Prolink software can be used to save this data to an ASCII file on a computer.Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting SummaryRecommendations 10 10. poor proving repeatability might be obtained. For small volume provers. The flow rate should never vary by more than ±10% while proving. Poor Repeatability Poor repeatability can be the result of problems with the: 1. Check the ball for erosion and scoring. • Make sure there is no entrained gas in the process fluid. Piping • Check for piping leaks. which may randomly trigger the counter.1. and the activation is repeatable. make sure the volume of the hose does not change while the meter is being proved. Prover • For conventional pipe provers. Recording the meter’s configuration factors every time the meter is proved is a useful tool to aid in troubleshooting meter performance. or the meter factor might be offset from a value of 1.67 seconds. but does not drag. Watch for oscillating control valves. Coriolis meter 4. • Check all block and bleed valves to ensure proper sealing is being accomplished. the density should vary by no more than 0. Coriolis Meter • Make sure the meter response time is appropriate for the prover size.0000. to ensure proper tempering of the system. the minimum allowable prerun time is 0. • Make sure the prover detector switches are functioning properly. greater is desired. Maintain sufficient pressure at the prover to keep the fluid from flashing. Piping 2. • If the meter is configured for mass measurement and is being proved with a volumetric prover.2 Proving Troubleshooting When proving Coriolis meters. A density averager will be required if the density variation exceeds this value.0002 g/cc. • If flexible hose is used for the prover connections. A prover prerun of 1 second or Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 135 .8. The following sections describe some methods that can be used to troubleshoot proving problems. Prover 3. make sure the plenum pressure has been properly set. Check for switch bounce. Process Fluid • Make sure the flow rate is stable during proving. • For small volume provers that use pressure to launch the piston. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. • A few passes of the ball or displacer should be made before initiating the proving. Refer to page 218 for information on vibration effects. or any flowmeter. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. • Make sure the meter mount is secure and stable.

Poor Meter Factor Reproducibility When a meter is proved. either by erosion or corrosion. the Coriolis meter damping factor should be set to 0. or from some type of coating. However. • The Coriolis meter is not zeroed properly. • The sensor flow tubes have been physically changed. which automatically compensates for the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. Zero The next thing that should be checked is the meter zero. This is usually accompanied by poor repeatability. the meter should be rezeroed. For information on the effects of pressure on mass flow accuracy. which is why many commercial density meters limit the maximum fluid flow rate and require a slipstream installation. Prior to any rezeroing. the meter response time may be too slow. or changes in the process fluid temperature or density may cause the meter’s “true zero” to change.0000. Selecting the proper sensor can minimize or eliminate this influence. double check to make sure valves are closed and not leaking. which can affect the short term repeatability of the meter. If the sensor being used is affected by pressure. which can result in an error in the meter factor determination.0000.8. Pressure can affect both the mass flow and density measurements. • The meter was previously miscalibrated. the volumetric flow measurement. Process Conditions Pressure After the damping factor and meter zero have been checked. Cavitation creates flow and noise disturbances.1. Because the density measurement is based on frequency. For the effects of pressure on density accuracy. the source of discrepancy usually lies in one of the following areas: • The Coriolis meter response time and the prover size are mismatched. subsequently. This is accomplished by installing an external pressure transmitter close to the sensor. Increasing the flow rate results in a slight change in the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes. The RFT9739 uses a three-point density calibration algorithm. or the flow calibration factor was inappropriately modified. there is no effect on the mass flow measurement. this will cause an error in the density measurement and. for more information on meter zeroing. refer to page 229 in Appendix G. An increase in pressure has a stiffening effect on the sensor flow tubes. refer to page 212 in Appendix F. the meter factor should be 1. • Prover calibration is incorrect. and wiring the pressure signal into the RFT9739 transmitter. For the effects of pressure on volumetric flow accuracy. which in turn affects the volumetric flow measurement. the next thing that should be checked is the operating pressure. Changes in sensor mounting conditions. an RFT9739 transmitter can be used to automatically compensate for pressure influence. page 195. The following sections describe how to resolve the discrepancies listed above. or very close to 1. If the meter zero has drifted out of specification. For small volume provers.10 Flow Proving Summary and Troubleshooting Summary Recommendations • Make sure there is no cavitation. Alternatively. and the same recommendations apply. If it is not. • Difference between the factory calibration lab conditions and the operating process conditions has caused a shift in the Coriolis meter calibration. refer to page 243 in Appendix H. the meter should be operated at a flow rate high enough that 136 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . in the order in which they should be checked. Refer to Appendix E. The damping value should never be set higher than 0. If the damping factor is too high. If the meter will Damping The first thing that should be checked is the meter damping factor. This influence only becomes significant at high fluid velocities (greater than 50% of the sensor’s nominal full-scale flow rate). Fluid Flow Rate One other influence is the effect of fluid flow rate on the density measurement. the zero drift is insignificant.

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

138 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

140 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

the Coriolis meter can be used in any service where a density measurement is needed.1 Overview Meter proving is typically performed with volumetric provers. the density factor (DF) is applied as shown in Equation 11-3. 11-1) 1 2 ρ = C a -. (Eq. for a detailed discussion on the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. Another option is to install an additional Coriolis meter at the prover to provide a density measurement. Any error in the density measurement will result in an equivalent error in the mass flow meter factor that is determined. One alternative to installing a density meter at the prover is to use the density measurement from the Coriolis meter. and influences on this measurement. The information in this section explains how to obtain and prove the Coriolis meter’s density measurement. When proving the Coriolis meter’s mass flow measurement. a density measurement must be made at the prover to convert the prover volume to mass. A Coriolis meter determines the process fluid density (ρ) from the natural frequency (f) of the vibrating flow tube. 11-2) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------ρ where ρ = Coriolis meter density measurement Refer to Appendix G. However. The density calibration constants Ca and Cb are determined when the meter is calibrated. page 223.11 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. – C b f Because the Coriolis meter is a vibrating tube density meter. it should be kept in mind that a Coriolis meter’s density and mass flow measurements are entirely independent of one another. it falls under the requirements of API MPMS 14.6. 11-3) BPV * C tsp * C psp * DF * ρ p MFm = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meter Pulses ----------------------------------- K–Factor Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 141 . The density measurement from a Coriolis meter could be thought of as being obtained from a separate measuring device. (Eq.6 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement—Continuous Density Measurement. the density of the meter is compared to the density determined from a reference device. If the Coriolis meter’s density measurement will be used to prove its mass flow measurement. 11. as shown in Equation 11-1. it is important to prove the density measurement against an established reference. To prove the Coriolis meter’s density. Some users might have concerns about using the Coriolis meter’s density measurement to prove the meter’s mass flow measurement. Therefore. This API standard contains a wealth of information on the installation and field verification of density measurement devices. (Eq. Much of the information presented in the following sections was obtained from API MPMS 14. The resulting density factor (DF) is determined as shown in Equation 11-2.

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

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

3 mm2) or larger twisted-pair cable. However. If polling addresses are used. 15 meters for 0. Each transmitter must have a unique polling address of 1 to 15. user terminals CN2-D22 (485B) and CN2-Z22 (485A). Depending on the selected protocol. the basic density measurement is updated by the microprocessor every 0.3 mm2 wire. it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible. The PV analog output will not change with varying process conditions. Therefore. independent of the frequency of vibration of the meter. Maximum cable length is 500 feet for 22 AWG wire. such as the RS-485. The value of the “internal damping” can be varied from 0 to 8192 seconds. The RFT9739 implements a selective digital software filter on the density output. depends on any additional “internal damping” that is applied. up to 16 transmitters can have unique polling addresses of 0 to 15. which approximates the time required for the output to achieve 63% of its new value in response to a step change in the density. The Bell 202 signal has a frequency of either 1. requirements vary as follows. with an amplitude of 0. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. Bell 202 Multidrop Networks — Up to 10 transmitters can be connected into a Bell 202 multidrop network that uses HART protocol.5 seconds. Assigning an address of 1 to 15 to the transmitter causes the PV analog output to remain at a constant 4 mA level. up to 32 transmitters can participate in the network.2 kHz. Consult 144 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . the response time of the digital density made available to digital outputs. Wiring between the transmitter and the communication device must be 22 AWG (0.1 mm2 wire). or a display. A limitation of analog outputs is that they must be properly scaled and trimmed to provide an accurate measurement.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 27 (485A). the primary variable (PV) analog output can only be used for digital communication in a multidrop network. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.1 seconds.8V peak-to peak. Bell 202. up to 15 transmitters can participate in the network. A loop resistance of 250 to 1000 ohms is required in order to communicate over the Bell 202 standard. A HART Communicator or other HART-compatible control system can communicate with any device in the network over the same two-wire pair. RS-485 Multidrop Networks — Multiple transmitters can participate in an RS-485 multidrop network that uses HART or Modbus protocol. use terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). • Under Modbus protocol. 50 feet for 28 AWG wire (150 meters for 0.2 or 2. but can be any device that supports the selected protocol. The baud rate is limited to 1200 baud. There are two independent analog outputs available from the RFT9739. A transmitter does not have to be a Micro Motion device. Analog Density The transmitter analog output is typically used for process control. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. The Bell 202 layer will not work with output configured for 0-20 mA. Each transmitter must have a unique tag name. Using multiple transmitters in a HART-compatible network requires assigning a unique address from 1 to 15 to each transmitter. Using the Bell 202 Standard The Bell 202 output signal is superimposed over the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. Digital Density Response Time Using an RFT9739. designated as the primary variable (PV) and secondary variable (SV) outputs. The most common device used for communicating with the transmitter in this fashion is the HART Communicator. Other Rosemount SMART FAMILY transmitters can also participate in a HART compatible network. • Under HART protocol. the “internal damping” value for density should not exceed 0. For proving applications. Therefore. The damping value is a filter coefficient. The PV analog output must be configured to produce a 4-20 mA output for the Bell 202 physical layer.

7 g/cc = 4 mA. so an external DC power supply is not required. the density can only be obtained from the SV analog output. The added damping value is the time coefficient of the secondary filter. Trimming the Analog Output Trimming of the analog output is required to ensure the analog output from the RFT9739 matches the reading of the input device used to provide the density indication (flow computer. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter.0125 X (mA) + 0.= -----------------------------------X max – X min ρ max – ρ min Interfacing to Analog Outputs The analog outputs are internally powered. and the 4-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 2-22 mA.9 – 0. PLC. the density-to-current relationship would be: X–4 ρ – 0. In this case. The most typical configuration is 4-20 mA.0 g/cc = 4 mA. with a 1000 ohm load limit.9 g/cc. and 1.65 Analog Density Response Time In addition to “internal damping” (see Digital Density Response Time. With an RFT9739 field-mount transmitter. Scaling the Analog Output The analog outputs can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. the primary analog output is obtained from terminals 17 (PV+) and 18 (PV–). it is important that the meter measurements be as responsive as possible.0 g/cc = 20 mA. Using these values. this output can be interfaced to an appropriate device that can accept and average an analog signal. use terminals CN2-Z28 (SV+) and CN2-D28 (SV–). if it is known that the fluid density will always fall in the range of 0.25 If the resolution of the measurement needs to be improved. They can be selected to be either 4-20 mA or 0-20 mA current outputs. 11-7) X – X min ρ – ρ min ---------------------------------. 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. which can be used to apply additional damping to the analog output density measurement. A typical configuration would be to set a density of 0. The primary analog is also used for Bell 202 communication. For proving applications.9 g/cc = 20 mA.5 to 8192 seconds.0625 X ( mA ) + 0. the density-tocurrent relationship is determined as shown in Equation 11-7. the secondary analog output is obtained from terminals 19 (SV+) and 20 (SV–). If means are not available to obtain the digital density.7 --------------------. one of the analog outputs can be configured for density and interfaced to an analog display device. 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. It is recommended that no additional damping be applied to the analog density output. The RFT9739 provides functions for trimming the analog output with a HART Communicator or the Prolink Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 145 .7 20 – 4 ρ(g/cc) = 0. For example. (Eq. The 0-20 mA configuration can be overranged to 0-22 mA. there is a secondary digital filter.= --------------0. The value of the “secondary damping” can be varied from 0.Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Recommended Meters for Density Measurement 11 the HART Communicator or ProLink manual when carrying out these operations. If density averaging is needed.7 to 0. With an RFT9739 rack-mount transmitter. DCS). The outputs are galvanically isolated to ±50 VDC. use terminals CN2-Z30 (PV+) and CN2-D30 (PV–). page 144). and 0. Based on these settings. the scaling range of the analog output can be reduced. the density scaling can be set to 0.

A thermohydrometer incorporates a temperature measurement directly into the hydrometer. to obtain the true density. the RFT9739 transmitter provides the capability of testing the analog output for performing troubleshooting operations. If the mA current reading at the input device is not 4 mA. Therefore. If the analog output has been configured for 4-20 mA. Hydrometer A hydrometer is essentially a graduated cylinder with a weight in the bottom. because the volume of the liquid being measured will change with changes in temperature. The mA current that was viewed is entered into the RFT9739 as the measured output. This degree of resolution is not as good as the density resolution of the Coriolis meter. 11. as shown in Equation 11-8. 4. which is used to correct the density reading from the density meter. This is particularly useful for making sure the density indication device is performing the milliamp-to-density calculation properly. the current output can be set to any value between 0 and 22 mA. It is important to remember that a density measurement under actual process conditions is needed — not a reference density measurement. 5.4 Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density proving parallels flow proving. then steps 2 through 5 are repeated. Hydrometers generally have a density measurement resolution of ±0. some accuracy may be sacrificed when proving using a hydrometer as the reference device. Fluid density is determined by reading the point at which the surface of the liquid cuts across the scale of the hydrometer. The density meter in this case is the Coriolis meter. the trimming operation would follow these steps: 1. The density factor is determined by dividing the density measurement of a reference device by the Coriolis meter’s density reading. steps 1 through 4 are repeated until an acceptable reading is obtained. The mA current being measured by the input device is viewed.001 g/cc. 11-8) Reference Device Density DF = --------------------------------------------------------------------------Coriolis Meter Density process pipeline at a point as close to the Coriolis meter as possible. the current output can be set to any value between 2 and 22 mA. Devices commonly available for performing the reference density determination are described below. Testing the Analog Output In addition to trimming. output from the RFT9739 is set to 20 mA. A fluid sample. using a current reading of 20 mA in step 5. The choice of reference device for determining “true” density depends on the required accuracy of the density determination. 2.11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement program. 6. a temperature measurement is also required to correct the hydrometer reading to the actual fluid temperature. If the mA current reading at the input device is 4 mA. The density factor is then multiplied by the Coriolis meter density reading. The upward buoyant force exerted on the hydrometer depends on the density of the fluid. If the analog output has been configured for 0-20 mA. Using one of these devices. which should be pulled from the 146 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . The hydrometer only reads correctly at its reference temperature (usually 60°F). is collected in a cylindrical container. Therefore. The purpose of density proving is to determine a density factor. (Eq. Then the hydrometer is floated in the container. and the properties of the process fluid being measured. The RFT9739 is then instructed to perform a calibration. Output from the RFT9739 is set to 4 mA. 3.

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

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

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

3. 10.Pycnometer pressure. Install the pycnometer in the density sampling loop as shown in either Figure 11-2. b. Any leakage from the pycnometer will void the test and require steps 4 through 9 to be repeated. Fill the pycnometer using the following valve opening sequence: a. b.05%. repeat steps 4 through 13 until two consecutive runs agree to within 0. If they do not. Coriolis meter temperature. Coriolis meter density reading.Pycnometer temperature. d.02%. Tm. It may necessary to record two or three readings and average them. Allow the system to achieve steady state conditions: a.) 8. Verify the scale calibration against certified test weights. Close density sampling inlet and outlet valves V1 and V3. Remove the pycnometer from the sample loop and check for leakage. b. Pp. Empty the pycnometer of its contents in a safe location. c.) d. the density update is fairly rapid. Check for agreement of temperature (to 0.) 11. 12. 9. Pm. 4. then close Vin.2°F) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. c. open the return valve V3.Check for agreement of pressure (to 1 psig) between the Coriolis meter and the pycnometer. to ensure there is no leakage from the pycnometer valves. and V3 should all be closed. 154 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters . c. or Figure 11-3. If a flow indication (FIp) is being used. Record the weight (Wf). There should be plans for worst case events. The inlet and outlet valves to the pycnometer Vin and Vout should be open. Break the pipe fitting between V1 and Vin. Open sampling loop inlet valve V1. page 150. Weigh the pycnometer immediately. Record density data: a. (Alternately. First close Vout. The density proving procedure is detailed below. 5.5 damping value. ρ. Tp. (It is suggested that three or four readings be made. personnel should be informed of escape routes and the location of the nearest fire extinguishers. Perform the following operations to disconnect and remove the pycnometer: a. e. Calculate the density factor (DF) for the two runs (as shown in the following section). ensure sufficient flow is being diverted into the sampling loop. an additional vent valve and line can be installed between valves V1 and Vin. e. Immediately close the pycnometer valves.Open vent valve V2 to discharge any vapor from the sampling line. 1. (With a 0. Verify the pycnometer’s evacuated weight (see page 155 for the procedure).11 Coriolis Meter Density Measurement and Density Proving Field Proving the Coriolis Meter Density Measurement Density Proving Procedure Again. Close the vent valve V2. a small amount of gas will be released.Open sampling loop vent valve V2. 13. d. there will be small changes in the last digits of the density reading. page 149. The density factor for the two runs must agree to within 0. 7. The measured evacuated weight must agree with the pycnometer’s certificate weight to within ±0. 6. 2.When the pycnometer and sampling loop are full of fluid. Personnel must have a complete understanding of the fluid properties and associated hazards. Adjust the throttle valve V4 to divert fluid into the sampling loop. Close V2. The density factors for the two runs are averaged to obtain the final density factor for the Coriolis meter (DFavg). 14. e. Verify that pressure and temperature measurement devices are operating suitably. Repeat steps 4 through 11 for a second run. Coriolis meter pressure.05%. Valves V1.Break the pipe fitting between Vout and V3. b. c. V2. 10 to 15 seconds apart. safety should be the top priority for the operating personnel of the density proving system.

**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

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

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

162 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters .

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

164 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

gal/min Meter Tag 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. Meter Serial No.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-3. Coriolis Meter Volume vs.

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

Coriolis Meter Volume vs. Meter Serial 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 . 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.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement Form A-5.

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. 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.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 . Coriolis Meter Volume vs.3454 Meter Factor = Corr. Meter Serial No. Gravimetric Tank Prover Company Target Test Quantity Weigh Scale Resolution Meter K-Factor Flow Rate lb lb pulse/gal Date Meter Model No.

1 1.7 0.325 kPa: g/cc=SG * 0.0019 1.6 0.0011 1.5 Correction Factor 1.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc kg/liter = 0.098 Table A-2.0007 1.999098 k/m³=SG * 999. g/cc 2. Table A-1.0007 1.001 * kg/m³ *If the density measurement unit is Relative Density (Specific Gravity).4 1.0006 1.0016 1.3 1.999012 k/m³=SG * 999.012 Relative to water at 15°C and 101. Buoyancy correction factors. Measurement Units Mass lb lb lb kg kg Volume gallons barrels cubic feet cubic meters liters Density* g/cc g/cc g/cc g/cc kg/m³ Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8.8 1. Relative to water at 60°F and 14.0005 1.9 1.0012 1.0014 1.7 1. Proving conversion factors.0 0.0023 172 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0009 1.8 0.696 psia: g/cc=SG * 0.5 1.2 1.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.0 1. the following relationships can be substituted into the conversion factors above.6 1.0005 1.0009 1.0008 1.A Proving Forms for Volume Measurement .0005 1.0007 1. kg/m3 2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 Density. Density.9 0.

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

174 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

Coriolis Meter Mass vs.B Proving Forms for Mass Measurement Form B-3.3454 Meter Mass (lb) = Pulses / K-Factor or = Totalizer Display Value Meter Factor = Prover Mass / Meter Mass MFproving = (average of above meter factors) Repeatability = (MFmax – MFmin) * 100 / MFmin % For Version 3 RFT9739 transmitters New Mass Meter Factor Register Value = MFcurrent * MFproving 178 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Meter Tag No. 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 Serial 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. 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. Coriolis Meter Mass vs. 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 .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

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

(PC ) Temperature correction. (DF ) = 1 – (Line 4 / ρTW ) = (Line 17 – Line 2) * Line 18 = Line 19 / Line 16 = Line 20 / Line 8 = (DFmax – DFmin) * 100 / DFmin = (DFrun1 + DFrun2) / 2 = DFcurrent * Line 23 % g = Ep * Line 12 = 1 + Et * (Line11 – Td ) = (Line 1 + Line 14) * Line 15 cm3 cm3 Fluid Weight 17 18 19 g Fluid Density 20 21 22 23 g/cc DF repeatability Average density factor RFT9739 Version 3 Transmitters 24 New density factory Comments WITNESS Signature Company Date 186 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .: 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. (Wf ) Buoyancy correction.C Proving Forms for Density Measurement Form C-1. Td (°F): 3 Serial No.0012 * [1 – (0. (Pp ) Ambient temperature g/cc °F psig °F psig °F = 0. (Mf ) Fluid density. ρA Pycnometer air-filled weight. Wa Field-evacuated weight. Field Wo Difference between field and certificate (≤0.000032 * Line 3)] Serial No.. (ρm ) Coriolis meter temperature.: PBV (cm ): Wo (g): Ref. (Tm ) Coriolis meter pressure. (Tp ) Pycnometer pressure. ρTW : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pycnometer base volume. (ρf ) Density factor. h Air density. PBV Pycnometer evaluated weight. Wo Elevation. (CBW ) Fluid mass. Coriolis Meter Density Proving Report Location: Product: CORIOLIS METER DATA Manufacturer: Model: Density of Test Weights. (TC ) Corrected volume.: Current DF : (7.: PYCNOMETER DATA Report No.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. Temp. (Pm ) Pycnometer temperature.84 g/cc for SS) Date: Meter Tag No. (PVtp ) Fluid filled weight.

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-1.999098 * SG(15°C) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 187 . Correcting the Coriolis Meter Density to Prover Conditions Company Meter Model No. Meter Serial No.428 * g/cc kg/m3 = 1000 * g/cc g/cc = . Meter Tag No.51 * g/cc lb/ft3 = 62.99012 * SG(60°F) g/cc = . Conversion Factor lb/gal = 8. Density conversion factors.Proving Forms for Density Measurement C Form C-2.3454 * g/cc lb/bbl = 350.

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.

15% 0.0050 1.10% 0.9975 0.0075 1. Prover Base Volume Passes Per Run Meter Measuring/Mass or Volume 1.05% 0.9925 Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial No.9950 0.00% 192 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Calibration Factor K–Factor Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Meter Factor Repeatability 0.0000 0. Meter Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.0025 1.D Proving Charts Form D-1.

0010 1. Prover Base Volume Sensor Model Sensor Serial Number Transmitter Model Transmitter Serial Number Density Calibration Factor 1. Density Factor Chart Location Fluid Proving Co.9980 0.00% Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 193 .0000 0.Proving Charts D Form D-2.0030 1.9990 0.0020 1.10% 0.05% 0.9970 Date: Flow Rate: Tmeter : Pmeter : Densitymeter : Tambient: Was meter rezeroed? Tprover : Pprover : Densityprover : Density Factor Repeatability 0.15% 0.

194 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

196 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

The meter would be reading high by 0. to calculate the measurement error from the average zero value and the operating flow rate. pressure. the meter must be rezeroed to bring it into tolerance. The average process conditions (temperature.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). page 198). page 204. Now the meter has no zero offset error. 7. If the meter was not reproved. Rezero the meter (Section E. contact the factory.2%.0%. 6.2. checking of the meter could then be discontinued. page 199. the meter factor of 0. Restore any modifications to low-flow cutoff or damping to their original values. Proper rezeroing of the meter will eliminate large zero offset errors. If the meter zero is consistently within tolerance over a period of one year. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until the measurement error is within acceptable limits.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? E.2) if the measurement error exceeds acceptable tolerance. an operating flow rate of 1000 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. By operating the meter within a 10:1 turndown from its maximum specified flow rate. Use Equation E-2. For example. It is best to select a meter that will operate in its upper flow range.1%. zero offset errors should be minimized.9980 would still be used and the meter output would be 200 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . 3. 5. 9. If the meter was rezeroed. Halt flow through the meter. If the measurement error cannot be made to be within acceptable limits. page 197.01%. This may require bypassing flow around the meter (see Section E. 2. double check to make sure valves are closed and there is no flow through the meter). refer to Section E.3. If desired. resulting in a meter factor of 0. reducing the need to rezero the meter. Record the average zero value. determined from zero readings accumulated over a 30 to 60 second time period. E. and density) should also be recorded. (Prior to rezeroing. and follow these steps: 1.1 lb/min. View the meter’s zero reading (see Section E. record both sets of data — before and after zeroing — and indicate on the meter zero chart that the meter was rezeroed. 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. Examples are provided below which illustrate cases where meter proving is needed and where meter proving is not needed. If a zero offset creates an error that exceeds the acceptable accuracy tolerance. Before the next proving the meter was rezeroed and the zero offset of +1 lb/min was eliminated. if the meter had a zero offset of 0. the meter should be able to continue to operate without rezeroing as long as the operating flow rate is not reduced substantially.7 Is Proving Required When The Meter Is Rezeroed? When the meter is initially put into service it must be zeroed and proved. 4. record the data collected from step 3 on form E-1. To evaluate the need for rezeroing. and a 10 lb/min operating flow rate would result in a measurement error of 1. whereas an operating flow rate of 100 lb/min would result in a measurement error of 0. The need for reproving when the meter is rezeroed will depend on whether or not procedures are established for tracking the meter’s zero performance over time. 8. Reinitiate flow through the meter. If desired. to track the meter’s zero performance over time.9980.

to determine if this zero offset value is excessive. d. A program has been put into place to check the meter zero every 2 weeks.1 lb/min.5 lb/min. there is potential for incorrectly zeroing the meter if valves are not fully closed. It is determined that the error due to this offset is insignificant for the operating flow rate of 500 lb/min. The following procedures can be followed to eliminate the need to reprove the meter every time it is rezeroed. 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. Check the meter zero as described in Step 1a. (If the zero cannot be brought in tolerance there may still be flow in the pipeline or there may be something wrong with the meter. Since the meter is being monitored and excessive zero offsets are eliminated when they arise.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. In the majority of applications the meter will never need to be rezeroed.05 lb/min zero offset. page 199. However. 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. If the zero offset is excessive. b. Prove the meter. page 198. 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. so care must be taken in adopting a meter zeroing procedure. The meter is rezeroed and afterwards the zero is checked again. Prior to proving the meter the zero is checked. The new offset is +0. c. Based on the examples above. In this case. 1. b. above. and it is found that there is a –0.) Record the new zero offset on the proving sheet. From this example it is easy to see why proving would be required after the meter was rezeroed to determine the correct meter factor. During a proving session do the following: a. Check the zero offset using Equation E2. 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 zero is checked after 2 weeks and is found to be offset by +0. Zero offset readings from all intermediate zero checks should be recorded. c. If the zero has shifted excessively. It is determined that this zero offset would not require rezeroing the meter.2%. Routine checks during proving would still be warranted. If necessary. The meter is checked again after the next 2 week period and found to be offset by +0. This would result in a +0. to make sure it has not drifted to make the meter fall out of acceptable tolerances. rezero the meter. If necessary rezero the meter. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 201 . until the zero is within tolerance. Use Equation E-2. 2. one may conclude that they should just establish a program to rezero the meter on a regular basis. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. Make sure to replace the old low flow cutoff after the proving session is complete. d. Repeat the procedure outline in Step 1a. If the zero offset does not create an excessive error leave it alone. above.3.03 lb/min. page 199.1% error at a flow rate of 500 lb/min. Any meter zeroing procedure should also include viewing the meter’s zero reading to make sure that zeroing is really needed. the meter does not need to be reproved every time it is rezeroed. the rezeroing maintenance procedure for the Coriolis meter could be eliminated. double check to make sure the valves are properly closed. Determine the meter’s average zero reading using the procedure described in Section E. Apply the following procedure in between provings: a.

if the meter is not properly zeroed. The average zero offset should also fall with Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2. which results in a +0. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. The meter should be rezeroed until it falls within specifications. the meter factor should not change significantly between the forward and reverse direction.2% error in the forward flow direction and a –0. Not having the meter properly zeroed can result in large errors. • It is also recommended that the test meter’s zero offset be checked as described in Section E.9 Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters Proper meter zeroing is critical for Coriolis master meters.0% error out).8 Zero Considerations for Bi-directional Flow The meter is often used to measure bidirectional flow for loading.2% error in and –1. • Before zeroing. Special consideration should be given to the meter zero for these types of applications. It has been verified experimentally that a Coriolis meter’s flow calibration factor is unaffected by flow direction.2% error in and –0. The normal operating flow rate is 500 lb/min.000 lb of product flows into the cavern at a rate of 500 lb/min and 100.000 lb. It is important to make sure the meter is properly zeroed. A zero offset will affect the accuracy of the meter and will be passed on to the meter being proved. Cavern Storage Example A meter has a +1 lb/min zero offset that has not been characterized.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of only 100 lb/min. unloading and cavern storage. The following hypothetical case is presented to illustrate some key points. Assume that 100. E. the meter would register 100.2% error out). To compound the problem.3. The net error would be 400 lb. The average zero offset must fall within Micro Motion’s published zero stability specification (see Table F-2.200 lb and flowing out the meter would deduct only 99. • The master meter must be zeroed every time it is moved to a new location.3. Flowing into the cavern. • 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. page 217).000 lb of product flows into the cavern and 100. page 198.E Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E. the master meter must be full of process fluid at the normal process temperature.800 lb. the meter would register 100. The guidelines below should be followed when using a Coriolis master meter. The net error would be 1200 lb. • The master meter offset should be checked as described in Section E. The best way to eliminate these types of errors is to establish a meter zeroing procedure in conjunction with meter proving. However. Flowing into the cavern.200 and flowing out it would deduct only 99. different proving meter factors can be obtained for the forward and reverse flow directions. page 198. assume that 100. most cavern storage applications have widely varying flow rates. As an illustration. If the meter has been zeroed properly. As flow rate decreases the zero uncertainty component increases. Determining different meter factors for the forward and reverse direction is of little use if the flow rate is varying significantly.000 lb of product is removed at a flow rate of 500 lb/min (+0.2% error in the reverse flow direction. The master meter uncertainty is the composite of the base uncertainty and the zero uncertainty. page 217). Also assume that the same +1 lb/min zero offset (+0. especially in applications where the flow rate fluctuates greatly. both in and out of the cavern. The total uncertainty for an ELITE master meter is obtained from the following equation: 202 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

If the master meter is a CMF300.25 % = ± 0. For example.Determining How Often a Coriolis Meter Should Be Zeroed Zero Consideration for Coriolis Master Meters E (Eq.* 100 Mass Flow Rate It is recommended that a minimum allowable flow rate for both the master meter and the test meter be established. E-3) Zero Stability Uncertainty% = ± 0. the zero stability is ±0. the mass flow rate must equal or exceed 166.25 lb/min ± 0.25% or less.* 100 Mass Flow Rate Minimum mass flow rate = 166.1% + --------------------------------------------. it is specified that the maximum allowable uncertainty is ±0. The proving flow rate must exceed the minimum mass flow rate of both the test meter and master meter.25%.7 lb/min In order to achieve an uncertainty of ±0. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 203 .25 lb/min. Substitute the uncertainty and the zero stability into Equation E-3 and solve for the mass flow rate: 0.7 lb/min.1% + --------------------------------------------.

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

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

206 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

26% per 100°C change in temperature. KT — The temperature coefficient compensates for the influence of tube temperature on the elasticity of the sensor flow tube material. KT and T (obtained from the sensor RTD). the flow tube becomes stiffer. As temperature decreases. Pressure correction is generally required only for 2-inch and larger sensors. the tube becomes more elastic. tzero — The zero value represents the baseline offset between the sensor pickoffs under no-flow conditions. However. The pressure components of Equation F-2. As pressure increases. are used only for specific sensors and applications that warrant pressure compensation. making it more difficult to be deflected. KP 0. Each sensor model behaves somewhat differently when fluid properties change. Table F-1.) Temperature coefficient. The value of the temperature coefficient is different for different flow tube materials. page 209. the larger the value of this factor. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate.0008 0.005 0. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. page 195. and is independent of changes in fluid properties.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The values ∆tzero. (Refer to Appendix E. The value of the correction coefficient varies from one sensor size to the next. Sensor Model D300 and DL200 D600 and DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient*. KP — The pressure coefficient compensates for the influence of fluid pressure on the stiffness of the flow tube. the tube becomes stiffer.0006 *Percent offset per psi pressure F.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy The Coriolis force depends only on the mass flow rate of the fluid. The larger the sensor. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor. for information about zeroing the meter. (Pressure input is shown in the lower functional blocks in Figure F-3. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. 210 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .0002 0. The unit of measure is grams per second flow per microsecond of time difference (g/s/µs). Table F-1 lists pressure coefficients for Micro Motion flow sensors that are affected by pressure. Pressure coefficient. Meter zero. The pressure measurement from an external pressure transducer can be input to the transmitter. The factor is different for each individual sensor. where it is used in the calculation of the mass flow rate. Calibration constant. are always used in the mass flow rate computation. Pressure coefficients for flow. 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. page 209 (KP .009 0. which would be interpreted as an increase in the mass flow rate. determined by zeroing the Coriolis meter at startup. As temperature increases. increasing the pressure inside the flow tube will cause it to deflect less. increasing the temperature of the flow tube will cause it to deflect a greater amount. Key parameters of Equation F-2 are discussed below. 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. which would be interpreted as a decrease in the mass flow rate. Under conditions of constant mass flow rate. The value of the calibration constant is determined when the meter is calibrated. Pmeas and Pcal). For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4.) The need for pressure correction is dependent on the sensor size and model.79% per 100°C change in temperature. and for Model DL sensors. The temperature signal from the RTD mounted on the flow tube is used by the transmitter to correct for the effect of temperature variations.

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

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

and does not disable the RFT9739 PV output. because it is easier to wire. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 213 . as shown in Figure F-6a.5W If a HART output is used. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. It is important to configure both the pressure transducer and the RFT9739 with unique (non-zero) communication “addresses” to allow communication. This method is only acceptable if the process pressure remains fairly constant (±10 psi for D300 and D600 sensors.5W 250Ω ±5% 0. The multidrop connection provides the pressure measurement from the pressure transducer using HART communication for polling. provides faster response time. ±100 psi for CMF200 and CMF300 sensors. the RFT9739 provides DC power to the pressure transmitter. In the 4-20 mA input configuration. eliminating the need for an external power supply. Therefore. Using a direct 4-20 mA input is preferable to the HART polling method described above. page 214. and cannot be used as a process variable output. The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. ±300 psi for CMF100 sensors). the pressure measurement is brought in as a multidrop connection on the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. The PV output will be driven to 4 mA in this case. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with HART (digital) communications Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0.5W 24 VDC RFT9739 field-mount Power supply Flow P RFT9739 rack-mount CN2 Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) Power supply 24 VDC D30 Z30 250Ω ±5% 0.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F 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 250Ω ±5% 0. the wiring will be connected as illustrated in Figure F-6b. If a 4-20 mA pressure signal input is used.

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

a zero offset will skew the nominal meter uncertainty.2 -0. (2) the sensor or transmitter is removed and reinstalled without rezeroing.6 -0. and reading the meter’s mass flow rate indication (as described in Section E.4 0. the measurement error can be calculated using Equation F-4. 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. Meter uncertainty versus flow rate for ELITE® sensors.4 -0. However. 1 Nominal meter uncertainty (%) 0.10% for ELITE sensors. If the meter is zeroed perfectly. It is important to understand that the boundaries shown in Figure F-7 represent the uncertainty in the meter’s measurement.* 100 Mass Flow Rate where Base Uncertainty = Accuracy of sensor. The amount of zero offset can be determined by halting flow through the meter completely. which represents the nominal uncertainty boundaries for a Coriolis meter. Figure F-7. The illustrated boundaries do not represent a signature curve for Coriolis meters. Once the amount of zero offset has been determined.3. determined from individual sensor specifications (±0. this difference is very small.15%) from the sensor’s specified maximum flow rate down to a flow rate of zero. ±0. However. Combined Effect of Zero Stability and Zero Offset The zero offset is the difference between the “stored zero” value and the “true zero” value. This relationship is illustrated in Figure F-7. F-3) Zero Stability Nominal Uncertainty (%) = ± Base Uncertainty (%) + --------------------------------------------.10% or ±0. or (3) pipeline stresses are applied to the sensor. page 198).2 0 -0. a large zero offset could occur if the meter is zeroed when (1) there is actually a small amount of fluid flowing through the sensor. expressed as a percentage. assuming that a “normal” zero value has been captured by the transmitter.15% for Model D sensors) Zero Stability = Determined from individual sensor specifications Mass Flow Rate = Operating flow rate From Equation F-3.8 0. the transmitter will capture the “true zero” value. as described below. and the meter calibration will fall within the base uncertainty (±0.8 -1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Nominal full-scale flow rate (%) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 215 .Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F (Eq. page 216.6 0. Generally.

* 100 Typical Operating Flow Rate The impact of a hypothetical large zero offset on meter accuracy is illustrated in Figure F-8. it is imperative that there be no fluid flow through the sensor.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 .5 0 -0. page 215. page 195. It is likely that temperature variations change the stresses in the flow tubes. or otherwise altered. repaired. As a result. In order to obtain an accurate zero.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy (Eq.5 1 0. Testing has been conducted on sensors to characterize the relationship between zero offset and temperature. 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. Furthermore. see Appendix E. The uncertainty limits were then determined from Equation F-3. serviced. The magnitude of the drift and the direction of the drift varies from one sensor to the next. Micro Motion’s uncertainty specification for the effect of temperature on the meter zero is presented in Table F-2. The exact mechanism by which temperature affects the meter zero is not fully understood. Zero offset errors can be eliminated by rezeroing the meter. page 215.) A less predictable cause of a zero offset is a change in flow tube temperature.1% of nominal full-scale flow. if the sensor mounting is changed or the sensor or transmitter is removed. F-4) Average Meter Reading at No Flow Zero Offset Error (%) = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. Zero offset error and uncertainty for an ELITE® sensor — based on an assumed zero offset of +0. Figure F-8. 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-7.1% of the meter’s nominal full-scale flow rate. These changes in stress levels can result in slight variations in the location of the pickoff detectors relative to one another. typical uncertainty limits have been established. which is interpreted as flow and results in a change in the meter’s “true zero” value. 2. the meter must be rezeroed. This graph illustrates the error that would result if the meter zero was offset by +0. The zero offset error points shown in Figure F-8 were determined by calculating the zero offset using Equation F-4. which presents measurement error and uncertainty. (For information about rezeroing.5 2 1.

Zero uncertainty specifications. the amount of temperature variation and the operating flow rates. F-5) 2 2 B + ( C * Toperating – T zero ) A + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.016 ±0. Table F-2 also lists the meter base uncertainty and zero stability values.10 ±0. °C Tzero = Temperature at which the meter was zeroed. 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. Legal trade requirements prohibit rezeroing the meter.08 ±0.* 100 Total Uncertainty (%) = ± Operating Mass Flow Rate where A B C = Base uncertainty. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 217 . Assessing the need for rezeroing is described in Appendix E.5 [C] Zero Offset Uncertainty for Temperature Effect* (lb/min/ °C) ±0. (Eq. ELITE meters should be selected because they have lower zero offset uncertainty versus temperature than Model D meters.000 Base Uncertainty (%) ±0.5 *Worst-case zero offset due to process fluid temperature change away from the zeroing temperature. Other Influences The following sections discuss other process variables and installation conditions that might affect the accuracy of the meter. and the magnitude of their impact will vary greatly from one application to the next.10 ±0. the less impact a zero offset will have. therefore.025 ±0. Temperature-related zero offset errors will be minimized by rezeroing the meter. pressure. The higher the operating flow rate.00125 ±0. lb/min = Zero offset uncertainty for the effect of temperature on the meter zero. unless the meter calibration is recertified.05 ±0. [A] Sensor Model CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 D600 Nominal Full-Scale Flow Rate (lb/min) 500 1600 5000 25. Any zero offset error is eliminated by rezeroing the meter at the new process temperature. page 195. and can be used to compute the total meter uncertainty for varying operating temperatures. % = Zero stability.Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy F Table F-2.25 ±2. Not every sensor will exhibit this amount of error. typically do not require rezeroing. °C It should be kept in mind that Equation F-5 describes the maximum uncertainty for all sensors. product composition) and. The need for rezeroing will depend upon the characteristics of the sensor.10 ±0. For applications that require a larger turndown. Such applications generally have steady process conditions (temperature. These influences are not well defined.15 [B] Zero Stability (lb/min) ±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. the tube vibration will drop below a measurable level. If it exceeds 13 volts DC. This does not affect the flow measurement accuracy. Vibration Because Coriolis sensors operate by vibrating the flow tubes. The sensor will perform better in these types of applications than in those where the gas easily breaks out and accumulates. the measurement accuracy of the meter will begin to degrade. Vibration testing has revealed that the introduction of random vibration can increase the variation in the meter’s flow measurement indication. stratified. fluids with higher surface tension will tend to create a more uniform dispersion of any entrained gas in the fluid. creating more of an emulsion. A point can be reached where the tubes will no longer vibrate at the design amplitude. and the flow tube will stop vibrating at 5 to 15 percent gas by volume. For proving applications this can result in unacceptable repeatability. At some point.F Mass Flow Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Mass Flow Accuracy Entrained Gas/Slugs of Gas Mixtures of gas and liquid in the sensor can be a significant problem. as illustrated in Figure F-9. This is called drive saturation. 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 . Entrained gas causes the meter reading to be low until the meter reaches the drive saturation point. but will result in a degradation in repeatability as the run time is decreased. The transmitter will automatically indicate an error condition when the drive becomes saturated. based on tests performed with air and water. The combination of gas and liquid dampens the vibration of the sensor flow tubes. Actually. yet they provide excellent performance. The meter drive gain reading can be used for determining whether drive saturation is occurring. The drive gain should normally be between 3 and 4 volts DC. the meter is no longer capable of making a measurement. which requires the drive circuitry to output more energy to keep the tubes vibrating. 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. In severely vibrating pipelines. sensors are often installed where they are exposed to external vibrations. Once drive saturation occurs.) • Fluid pressure Larger sensors have a lower tolerance for entrained gas than smaller meters. Sensors are designed to withstand vibrational amplitudes associated with good pipeline practices. However. well mixed. severe drive saturation has occurred. Significant measurement errors will occur as the tube amplitude decreases. even though the maximum power is being applied to the driver. Once this occurs. at which time the output becomes unpredictable. page 219. the amount of current that can be supplied to vibrate the tubes is limited. the sensor can be isolated from the vibration with flexible piping and vibration isolating pipe supports. In general. because the fluid has a greater influence on the overall mass of the system (tube and fluid) as the tube size increases. Performance ranges for a sensor’s ability to handle entrained gas. a common misconception is that they will not function properly in an environment that is subject to vibration. The shorter the batch the worse the repeatability will become. Due to intrinsic safety limitations. are: measurement errors will start to occur at approximately 1 to 3 percent gas by volume. A sensor’s sensitivity to entrained gas is difficult to determine. etc. it is advisable to install adequate vibration isolation for a Coriolis sensor in an environment where piping and other process equipment have experienced vibration-related failures.

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

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

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

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

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

224 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

Portions of the following sections are the same as presented in Appendix F. obtained from the RTD. and damping. which causes the natural frequency to decrease even though the mass Figure G-3. the flow rate of oil in an oil-water emulsion can be determined.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy increase in the tube period. the tube will become more elastic. Temperature The effect of temperature on the elastic properties of the tube material was discussed briefly in Section G.06 0. (For example. page 225. mass. If the tube temperature increases. 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. peripheral devices are available that provide additional information about the process fluid.) G. Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters. Due to design variations. each sensor model and size will behave somewhat differently when fluid properties change. 0. the net flow rate of one or more components in a multi-component mixture can also be determined.02 0 -0.02 30 60 90 120 Temperature (°F) 316L Hastelloy C-22 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 228 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . is used to correct the natural frequency measurement for temperature related changes in the elastic modulus of the flow tube material. its density measurement will be affected by changes in tube stiffness.08 Density error (g/cc) 0.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Because a Coriolis meter operates like a vibrating spring/mass system. Temperature and pressure are the primary factors that affect flow tube stiffness.04 0. In addition to providing density. Temperature effect on density measurement — if there were no temperature compensation. 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.1. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. Additional factors that can affect a meter’s density measurement include: • • • • Flow rate Orientation Entrained gas External vibration • Erosive properties of the fluid • Coating or plugging of the flow tubes Many of these factors affect both the mass flow rate and density measurements. The tube temperature.

and the density measurement can be corrected. page 226. which increases the tube frequency.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G of the system has not changed.00000 -0. All Micro Motion meters provide continuous compensation for temperature effect.26% per 100°C change in temperature. This would result in an increase in the tube period. using the RTD mounted on the sensor flow tube. divide the density error by the operating density and multiply by 100. which is stamped on the serial number tag attached to the sensor. However.00020 -0. In bent-tube designs. geometry. diameter. 0. Figure G-4 illustrates the magnitude of the pressure effect on D600 and CMF300 sensors calibrated at 20 psig. The effect of temperature on the density measurement can be characterized. A pressure correction factor is entered into the transmitter. and for Hastelloy® C-22 it is approximately 2. Pressure The effect of pressure on the sensor is a combination of several different mechanisms. and a subsequent increase in the density indication. the fluid pressure generates significant forces normal to the tube walls (along the axis of the tubing). The influence of pressure on the CMF300 density measurement is an order of magnitude less than it is for the D600. This results in a stiffening of the flow tube. as shown in Equations G-8 and G-9. This axial force acts to offset the hoop stress on the flow tube. a correction method similar to the temperature correction for material elasticity can be employed. (acting perpendicular to the tube wall). However. resulting in a decrease in the tube period and a subsequent decrease in the indicated density. To obtain the error percentage. page 230. and material of construction determine the magnitude of the pressure influence on the sensor.79% per 100°C change in temperature. A pressure transducer is mounted in the pipeline as close to the sensor as possible. which automatically compensates for pressure effects using Equation G-10. The flow tube wall thickness. Pressure effect on density measurement — no pressure compensation. Smaller sensor sizes exhibit a negligible pressure effect on meter accuracy.00010 Density error (g/cc) 0.00030 0 20 40 60 80 100 D600 CMF300 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density Pressure (psig) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 229 . Figure G-3 illustrates the effect of temperature on the meter’s density measurement if no temperature compensation were used. For 316L stainless steel the temperature coefficient is approximately 4. the effect becomes more pronounced with increasing sensor size. An increase in pressure causes an increase in the flow tube hoop stress Figure G-4. If a particular sensor is sensitive to pressure.00010 -0. the effect of pressure on the sensor is complicated by the tube geometry. The magnitude of the temperature influence on elasticity depends primarily upon the material of construction of the flow tube. The signal from the pressure transducer is input to the RFT9739. The actual temperature coefficient for a particular sensor is found in the last three digits of the sensor’s calibration factor.

Model D300 and DL200 sensors have the greatest pressure effect on density. KPden(g/cc/psig) 0. has such a slight density effect that *Standard-pressure model (DS300) only. 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. Pressure coefficients for density.5W 250Ω ±5% 0.. which has a modified flow tube geometry. The values presented in Table G-1 illustrate that variations in flow tube geometry can entirely eliminate the hoop stress stiffening effect of pressure.0000031 0.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy (Eq. The pressure transducer must provide either a 4-20 mA or HART output for use with the RFT9739 transmitter.5W 230 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .00000022 where ρcorrected = Corrected density ρmeasured = Uncorrected meter density indication = Pressure coefficient for density KPden (Table G-1) = Measured pressure under Pmeas flowing conditions.000006 –0. Highpressure model (DH300) has no pressure effect. it remains well within specification over its entire rated pressure range. Sensor Model D300* and DL200 D600 DL100 CMF100 CMF200 CMF300 Coefficient.000001 0. G-10) ρ corrected = ρ measured + K Pden * P meas Table G-1. and some are negative. the CMF300. Automatic pressure compensation for density cannot be performed by the RFT9712 transmitter.5W 250Ω ±5% 0.000001 –0. Figure G-5a. Flow P Pressure transmitter SMART only (1151 or 3051) 250Ω ±5% 0. psig Table G-1 lists pressure compensation coefficients to correct the density measurement of sensors that are affected by pressure.00001 0. Some of the correction factors are positive.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 wiring will be connected as illustrated in Figure G-5b. It is important to configure both the pressure transducer and the RFT9739 with unique (non-zero) communication “addresses” to allow communication. If a 4-20 mA pressure signal input is used. The new calibration factor is determined as shown below: (Eq. ±125 psi for D600 sensors. This method is only acceptable if the process pressure remains fairly constant (±50 psi for D300 sensors. G-11) K2 new = measured [ ( K2 old ) 2 – ( K1 old )2 ] * ---------------------. 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 . An alternative to on-line compensation is to determine a new K2 meter calibration factor at the operating process fluid pressure. the RFT9739 provides DC power to the pressure transmitter. The PV output will be driven to 4 mA in this case. and does not disable the RFT9739 PV output. The multidrop connection provides the pressure measurement from the pressure transducer using HART communication for polling. ±80 psi for CMF100 sensors.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G If a HART output is used. provides faster response time. as shown in Figure G-5a.0005 g/cc). Using a direct 4-20 mA input is preferable to the HART polling method described above. the pressure measurement is brought in as a multidrop connection on the RFT9739 primary variable (PV) analog output. these pressure ranges result in errors within ±0. In the 4-20 mA input configuration. RFT9739 wiring connections for pressure compensation with analog input. because it is easier to wire. eliminating the need for an external power supply. and ±500 psi for CMF200 sensors. and cannot be used as a process variable output.+ ( K1old ) 2 ρ corrected ρ Figure G-5b.

(K1 and K2 should not be confused with the constants Ca and Cb presented in Equations G-6. it uses an FD compensation value. For flow rates less than 50% of the nominal flow rate (the CMF300 nominal flow rate is 5. the K3 value listed in Table G-2 may be used. ρcorrected The best recommendation for minimizing pressure influences is to use a sensor that is least affected by pressure. Therefore.000 8. Sensor Orientation If the orientation of the sensor is changed. and G-8. 0. the flow rate effect on density is insignificant. beyond this point the error increases exponentially. the density reading is greatest when the tubes are oriented upward.000 lb/min).000 6. The FD algorithm is based on the measured density of the calibration process fluid.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy where = Determined from Equation G-10. there will be a shift in the meter’s density reading.005 Density error (g/cc) 0. The K3 algorithm is based on water as the flowing medium. however. page 226. G-7.6 or later. all earlier RFT9739 versions use a K3 value. Fluid Flow Rate Increasing fluid flow rate causes the frequency of vibration of the flow tubes to decrease. The magnitude of the effect of fluid flow rate varies from one sensor to the next. Figure G-6 illustrates the effect of increasing fluid flow rate on the density measurement of a CMF300. more accurate.000 0 2. The frequency of vibration of the sensor flow tubes is lower when the flow tubes are oriented upward than when they are oriented downward.002 0. page 230. For older RFT9739 transmitters. K1 and K2 = Represent the measured tube periods determined when the meter is calibrated on air and water. and lowest when the tubes are oriented downward. but appears to be related to variations in gravitational forces.000 g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 232 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .000 4. This results in an increase in the tube period and a subsequent increase in the density indication. The influence of fluid flow rate is negligible at low flow rates and increases with increasing flow rate. respectively. The mechanism for this influence is not well understood. Therefore. the effect is not linear. however. therefore. The RFT9739 uses a three-point flowingdensity calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density.000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) 10. 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. Fluid flow rate effect on density measurement — CMF300 with no compensation. 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. CMF200 and CMF300 sensors are preferred over D300 sensors. and is. rather than the FD value listed in Table G-2. It is recommended to use this FD value.001 0.004 0. If the RFT9739 has software version 3. if possible.003 0. The effect generally decreases with increasing sensor size.

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

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

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

additional wall thickness is of little benefit and will not greatly extend the life of the flow tube. In order to minimize the effects of erosion. a crack will initiate at a pit. Also. Effect of wall thickness reduction on density measurement — ELITE® CMF300 sensor.108 Wall thickness (in) 236 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . the halogen ions would not cause a tube failure. Once a crack has begun.116 0. In an environment where there were no alternating stresses or very low Velocity of Sound Velocity of sound influences are related to the localized compression and decompression of fluid at the surface of the flow tube as the tube vibrates back and forth. which results in alternating stresses continuously being applied to the tubes.112 0. stresses. Consult the Micro Motion Corrosion Guide. Corrosion Figure G-8. If the velocity of the flow tube wall approaches the velocity of sound in the process fluid. Select flow tubes with the largest inner diameter that is practical for the measurement application.114 0. However.G Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy Severe erosion can result in failure of the flow tube. your sales representative or the factory for questions about material suitability. also illustrates the effect of material loss due to corrosion.06 0. The presence of these alternating stresses makes Coriolis sensors susceptible to corrosion-fatigue failure.02 0. A Coriolis sensor could fail in an environment that would not be predicted from general corrosion data. For additional resistance to corrosion. it quickly widens and causes failure of the flow tube. The effect of these compressive and decompressive forces depends on the interaction of the vibrating flow tube and the velocity at which sound travels through the fluid. which illustrates the impact of a uniform reduction in flow tube wall thickness on the density indication of a CMF300 sensor. In this type of corrosion. there will be localized compression of the fluid at the tube wall.10 0. 0. Figure G-8. An example of this is a stainless steel flow tube exposed to a process fluid that contains free halogen ions.08 Initial wall thickness 0.00 0. which will cause a localized increase in the fluid density. the impact of corrosion on a Coriolis meter is complicated by the vibration of the flow tubes. select sensors that have the most gradual bends in their flow tubes. Sharp bends are prime sites for tube erosion. This phenomenon is known as stress-corrosion cracking.118 0. However. ELITE sensors are available with flow tubes of Hastelloy C-22.04 0. the fluid velocity inside the flow tubes should be kept below 10 feet per second when measuring abrasive materials. if the vibration of the tube results in local stress levels that exceed the fatigue limit of a pitted material.120 Density error (g/cc) g/cc error * 100 % error = --------------------------------------------operating density 0.110 0. Halogen ions cause a breakdown of the protective oxide layer of stainless steels and cause pits to form.

( Tube Period ) 2 0. it is very unlikely that velocity of sound influences would create a density measurement error for Micro Motion Coriolis meters. Velocity of sound. which approximates the flow tube velocity for a Micro Motion meter.06 inches (the tube will move from peak to peak in onehalf tube cycle) Tube frequency = 160 Hz (equal to approximately 0. A simplified calculation. Hydrocarbon product Pentane n-Butane CO2 Propane Velocity of sound* (ft/sec) 598 676 842 857 *Velocity when product temperature is 30°F. 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. Table G-4. and have low tube displacements (less than 0.2 in/sec = 1.003125 seconds per one-half tube cycle) Total Displacement Tube Velocity = --------------------------------------------------------1 -. (Eq.003125 sec = 19. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 237 . is provided below. The velocity of the Coriolis meter flow tube is approximately 350 times less than the velocity of sound of pentane. (This calculation is quite conservative. The velocity of sound in liquids is significantly higher than in gases.00625 seconds per tube cycle.Density Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Density Accuracy G The velocity of sound influence is a problem for density meters that have a high flow tube velocity — those with a high operating frequency or large tube displacements. page 234). Therefore.06 in = ---------------------------------0. This phenomenon should not impact Micro Motion meters.6 ft/sec The velocity of sound for gases can be determined from Equation G-12. because the vibrating frequency is generally much lower than 160 Hz. 0.03-inch peak displacement).) Total displacement = 0. which operate at low frequencies (less than 160 Hz — see Table G-3.

238 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

240 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

the effect of temperature on density is of larger magnitude than the effect on mass flow rate. pressure. 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. and velocity of sound. viscosity. such as: entrained gas. 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. corrosion. see Appendix G. Thus. From Equation H-1. page 205. and any influence that results in an increase in the indicated density will cause a decrease in the indicated volume. erosion. page 205. The RTD mounted on every sensor’s flow tube provides continuous compensation for the effect of temperature on the mass flow rate and density Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 241 . and G. H. as shown in Equation H-1. The influences described below explain how the combination of mass and density influences affect the volume measurement. page 211. Refer to Appendices F. density. volumetric flow can be determined. 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.1 Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Measurement Since Coriolis meters provide independent mass flow and density measurements.Appendix H Volume Measurement H.2 Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Because the volumetric flow rate is determined from the mass flow rate and density measurements. However. sensor orientation. and flow rate on the volume measurement. vibration. (Eq. page 228.000. for details concerning other effects. coating. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. the calculated volume will be affected by all of the parameters that affect the mass and density measurements (described in detail in Appendices F. The following sections illustrate the impact of temperature. page 205. In order to understand how the mass flow measurements are made. flow profile. page 223. an increase in temperature results in a decreased volume indication. A brief discussion of zero influences is also included. and G-3. it can be seen that an increase in temperature causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to increase. page 223. page 223). refer to Appendix F. and G. for density. Referring back to Figures F-4.

Pressure effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — no pressure compensation.1 -0.000 Figure H-3. Temperature effect on volumetric flow rate measurement — if there were no temperature compensation.000 242 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . Automatic temperature compensation is standard for all meters.0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0.3 -0. 0 Volumetric flow rate error (%) -0.0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Temperature (°F) Figure H-2.2 -0. Effect of mass flow rate on volumetric flow rate measurement — CMF300 no compensation.000 -6.3 -0.H Volume Measurement Influences on Coriolis Meter Volumetric Flow Rate Accuracy Figure H-1.1 Volumetric flow rate error (%) 0 -0.5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Mass flow rate (lb/min) % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.2 -0.4 -0.1 -0.0 -4.0 316L Hastelloy C-22 -2.4 0 20 40 60 Pressure (psig) 80 100 D600 CMF300 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1.2 0. 2.0 % error effect based on specific gravity = 1. 0.

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. starting on page 214.000. for additional information about zero influences on mass flow measurement. calibrated at 20 psig. Thus. page 195. an increase in pressure results in a decreased volume indication. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. Zero Influences Changes in the meter zero will affect the meter’s mass flow rate measurement. it can be seen that an increase in flow rate causes the density indication to increase. with no pressure compensation. and G-4. page 229. A positive zero offset will cause an increase in the mass flow rate measurement. resulting in a subsequent decrease in the volumetric flow rate measurement. an increase in flow rate results in a decreased volume indication. subsequently. Zeroing requirements are discussed in Appendix E. as described on page 212 for mass flow measurement. The impact of pressure can be compensated for.000. Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 243 . However. the effect of pressure on density is much smaller than the effect on mass flow rate. page 228. Referring back to Figure G-6. a negative zero offset will cause a decrease in the mass flow rate measurement.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.. The percentage error shown is based on a process fluid with a specific gravity of 1. as described in detail in Appendix F.2. for additional information about compensating for this effect. page 214. Refer to Meter Zero Influences. and on page 229 for density measurement. Refer to Section G. Referring back to Figures F-5. Conversely. The RFT9739 uses a threepoint flowing-density calibration algorithm that automatically compensates for the influence of fluid flow rate on density and. it can be seen that an increase in pressure causes both the mass flow rate and density indications to decrease. resulting in a subsequent increase in the volumetric flow rate measurement. page 212. page 232. volume.

244 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

246 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

along with the pass-to-pass repeatability.0 0. Figure I-1 shows proving data from a D600 sensor proved with a 24-inch Compact Prover.8 1. In order to use Equation I-1 the meter factors for an initial group of proving passes must be determined.010 1.000 0. at a variety of flow rates. Meter factors and repeatability versus flow rate.004 1. page 248.05%.Appendix I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run I.996 0. The D600 data was analyzed using the pass grouping method illustrated by Figure 8-9. Figure I-1. A general recommendation for the required number of passes for a Coriolis meter cannot be made because it depends on the size of the prover and the fluid flow rate.2 1.2.992 0.998 0. This analysis determined the number of passes per run that provided repeatability of less than 0.4 1. 1. Thirty prover passes are recommended for this initial group.002 1. page 102.1 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.008 1.6 1.6 0.994 0.0 25000 Meter factor 1.4 0.990 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Repeatability (%) Meter factors Repeatability Flow rate (lb/min) Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 247 . Equation I-1 was then applied to the first 30 proving passes at each flow rate shown in Figure I-1. for each flow rate.2 0.012 1. Shown are typical results for a Model D600 sensor and an RFT9739 transmitter with a 24-inch Compact™ Prover. The results of these two analysis methods are presented in Table I-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.006 1.8 0. are shown in Figure I-1. The following is an example of how Equation I-1 can be applied. These data illustrate the repeatability results becoming significantly poorer at higher flow rates. The meter factors for the individual proving passes.

page 104. the proving duration can be set to any desired length of time. In instances such as the one described above. PulsesMIN = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the fewest number of pulses.3.0 1. Details of transfer standard proving procedures are presented in Section 3.067 0.05% could not be obtained within 20 prover passes.049 4 5 0.117 0. then dividing by the number of passes.* 100 Pulses AVG where = Repeatability is given as a percentage (not a decimal) value. page 30.031 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. Repeatability criteria ≤ 0. Because there are no volume limitations with master meter proving. it was predicted that 51 proving passes would be required.326 0.3 Pass-to-pass repeatability (%) 0.5. (Eq.4 13.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 Table I-1. where the prover is undersized and adequate repeatability cannot be obtained. then proving the Coriolis meter against the transfer standard meter. page 247).45 seconds — below the recommended minimum of 0. Typical results using a Model D600 sensor and RFT9739 transmitter. This involves proving the transfer standard meter against the prover.605 1.042 6 3 0. the prerun time was only 0. transfer standard proving may be required.031 12 10 0. I-2) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN R(%) = -----------------------------------------------------------.040 4 3 0. R 248 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .044 5 5 0.3 2.019 3 15 0. Therefore.2 3. PulsesMAX = Obtained by finding the proving pass that produced the greatest number of pulses.038 12 15 0.3 2.239 0.299 lb/min.2 Derivation of Equation I-1 The measure of whether a proving is acceptable or not is the proving repeatability. The values in Equation I-2 are obtained by performing a series of proving passes.080 0. Proving repeatability for volumetric flowmeters is generally calculated as shown in Equation I-2. It was determined that the meter and prover were incompatible at this flow rate.039 5 10 0. Issues related to using transfer standard meters and volumetric master meters are discussed in Section 8.667 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. for flow rates of 19.126 0.6 1.05% Passes per run Repeatability from grouped from Passes per run data grouped data from Equation I-1 5 0. At the highest flow rate of 24. Number of passes per run.139 0. Twenty passes is typically considered to be the practical limit for the number of passes per group. At this flow rate. The actual test data showed that repeatability of less than 0. correlate very well with the pass grouping method. repeatability is used as the criteria for defining how many proving passes per run are required. page 247. proved with a 24” Compact™ Prover (Results from Figure I-1.67 seconds.4 5.867 lb/min and less. I.153 0.

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

which results in Equation I-10. 250 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters . The average. the following relationship should be true: (Eq. (Eq. These values are entered into Equation I-12 and the required number of passes per run is determined.I Equation for Predicting Number of Passes Per Run Derivation of Equation I-1 (Eq. 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. (Eq. I-10) ( Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN ) * 100 Passes = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG * Pulses stdev * R 2 For a meter that measures mass. at least 30 proving passes must be performed. the meter factor (MF) is substituted in Equation I-10 for the number of pulses. which results in Equation I-11.05% was substituted into Equation I-11 to provide Equation I-12. I-7) Pulses MAX – Pulses AVG z = ------------------------------------------------------------Pulses stdev For a uniformly distributed population. I-11) 50 * ( MF MAX – MF MIN ) Passes = -------------------------------------------------------------MF AVG * MF stdev * R 2 A repeatability of R = 0. maximum and minimum are determined from the meter factors for the 30 passes. the number of pulses cannot be used. standard deviation. Therefore. because density variations are not accounted for. I-9) Pulses MAX – Pulses MIN z = -----------------------------------------------------------2 * Pulses AVG The formula for the z statistic is then substituted into Equation I-6. (Eq.

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

252 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Flowmeters .

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

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

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

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

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. 150. 17 recommendations 133. 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. 161 in-line 22 mass measurement 25–27. 237 Density sampling container 26 installation 153 line 147. 53 nominal 202 normal 11 procedures 105 prover size recommendations 90 required number of runs 123 pressure effect on mass 212 proving 5. 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. 35 damping 54 mass measurement 22 meter factor calculation 113 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 257 . 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.1 Density meter 4 API standard 153 calibration 65 density measurement device 64 field proving 146. 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. See Pickoff detectors Flow measurement analog output 48 custody transfer 9. 147 fluid flow rate 136. 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. 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.

231 multidrop network Bell 202 48. 236 density 45.Index variation 56 zero offset error 199 zeroing influences 215 Flow tube xxi. 144 M mA outputs. 3 coating 228. See Outputs Mass measurement 4. 134 K K-factor xxi. 241 transfer standard 30 troubleshooting 135–137 velocity of sound 236. 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. 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 . 114 pulse scaling factor determination 52 H HART Communicator . 229. 230. 235 corrosion 221. 237 vibration 218. 17. 233 zero offset 216 Frequency totalizing device 62. 228. ProLink software program analog density 145 analog output 48 analog output trim 145 Bell 202 48 density measurement 65. 121. 113. 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. 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. 116 Coriolis meter configuration 113. See also HART protocol. 123 Full-scale flow xxi density factor offset 161 maximum 56. 143 digital output 46 frequency/pulse output 53 K-factor 52 low-flow cutoff 56 meter information 57 meter zeroing 197 proving summary 134 troubleshooting 159 volume measurement 29 HART protocol communication configuration 143 mA outputs 213. 230 process fluids 220 sensor mounting 39 system mass 226 temperature 226. 144 RS-485 47.

112 erosion 90. 122 prover volume 4. 247 flow tube changes 137. 71 volumetric proving 18 volumetric proving requirements 20 volumetric tank proving 79 Meter factor xxi accuracy Coriolis master meter 111.1 flow rate measurement 241 fluid flow rate 136. 110 volumetric tank proving 79 calibration 137 damping pipe prover 91 proving accuracy 55 small volume prover 104 troubleshooting 136 density measurement 65 error 30 flow rate 56. 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. 82 density measurement 225–237 density proving 141–148 inventory 129 analog output 48 custody transfer 35 density proving installations 150 frequency output 49 output recommendations 46 transfer standard proving 30 transmitter outputs and configuration 134 mass 79. 151 proving instruments 61 proving procedure 26. 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 . 122–123. 85–87. 32 mass meter factor 122. 27. 243 proving devices 65 proving equipment 25. 28 recommendations 159 reproducibility 158 required equipment 79 RFT9739 transmitter 133 small volume prover uncertainty 97 small volume provers 94 volume measurement 29. 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. 161 inventory calculations 129 mass measurement 22. 123 measurement devices 64 meter proving 10 pressure 136. 161 inventory calculations 128–130 mass xxiii. 27. 45 volumetric master meter uncertainty 109 volumetric tank proving uncertainty 81. 136 rezeroing 200 temperature measurement 63 time between provings 12 transfer standard meter 104 trend chart 12. 101 volume measurement 32 reproducibility 126. 100 prover prerun 99 tank volume 83 average 102. 124 number of proving runs 90. 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. 72 volumetric flow rate 4. 71.

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

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. 57 meter zeroing 197 troubleshooting with 135 using for simulation 53 volume measurement 30 Protocol. 243 tube stiffness 211 Process conditions xxii. 92. 89 accumulating pulses 89 damping 55. 136 rezeroing 200. 143 connecting to transmitter 145 density measurement density device 65 digital output 46. 98 K-factor 45 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19 pipe prover 85 pressure measurement device 63 process conditions 124 size 90. 26 optical 94. 91 prover size recommendations 100 small volume prover 98. 100 small volume prover 91. 144 calibration 9. 86. 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. 93 transfer standard proving 30 volume measurement 18 volumetric tank proving 79 Index Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 261 . 3 accuracy 210 analog output 48. 217 stability 124 temperature 151 transfer standard proving 31 troubleshooting 160 uncertainty 108 volume measurement 18 volume meter factor 121 zero offset 199 zero stability 214 ProLink software program . Modbus protocol Prover detectors density averaging device 65 density measurement 28 mass measurement 23. See also HART Communicator calibration 158 communication configuration 46–48. See HART protocol. 117 mass measurement 22 mass meter factor 122 master meter proving 106 meter proving 12 proving calculations 29 repeatability 90. 20 proving computer 61 volume base xxiii meter factor calculation 80. 103 reproducibility 126.1 mass flow measurement 208. 143 density proving 151 meter information 47. 52. 229 mass flow 212. 212 prover volume 23 sensor 229 volume 242. 99 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 stationary conventional pipe prover 85 minimum mass proving 23 minimum volume proving 19. 209 meter zero influences 214 zeroing 197 Pressure coefficient 210. 94 volume meter factor 121 Coriolis meters 5 correction factors conventional pipe prover 88 Coriolis master meter 116 meter factor uncertainty 126 small volume prover 97 volumetric tank proving 82 volumetric transfer standard 109 damping 55 density measurement 141 detector switch 89. 95 pulse interpolation 93 volume measurement minimum volume proving 19 prerun xxii. 160 Coriolis meter proving 110.

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

Pickoff sensors T Temperature accuracy 241 coefficient 210 correction coefficient 226 effect density 18. 136. 160 vibration 218 volume measurement 20. 106 transfer standard proving 30 Proving Micro Motion Coriolis Meters 263 . 127 density factors 158 meter factors 136 Response time analog density 145 Coriolis master meter 111. 99 reproducibility 136 tank proving 90 digital density 144 flow measurement 53 pressure measurement 213. 89. 160 damping factor prerun duration 56. 142 Sensor. 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. ELITE sensor. 232. 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. 211 small volume prover 94 temperature measurement device 63 volumetric tank proving 79 Index S Sampling systems 4. 46 damping 54 density 151 density measurement 65 fluid flow rate 136. 210. 32 volumetric master meters 111 volumetric tank proving 83 Reproducibility 126. 213.1 poor with leakage 89 pressure devices 152 prover size 90. 27. 22. Model D sensor. See Coriolis sensor. 214 pressure effect density factor offset 161 density measurement 229. 231 troubleshooting 136 recommendations density measurement 142–146 meter 133 summary 159 viewing zero reading 198 volume measurement 18 zeroing 197 RTD xxi conventional pipe prover 85 density measurement 227. 228 flow rate accuracy 241 meter mass flow accuracy 208. 101 proving 248 proving computer 61 proving recommendations 134 proving runs 156 pulse accumulation 98–99 small volume prover 103 trend charts 12 troubleshooting 135. 231 proving accuracy 55 transfer standard proving 30 troubleshooting 135 Rezeroing 56 analog output 48 error 199–201 frequency 197 installation recommendations 40 mass flow accuracy 220 reproducibility 136 sensor installation 133 trend charts 12 zero offset 215–217 RFT9712 transmitter 35 density measurement 142 inventory calculations 129 k-factor 52 low flow cut-off 56 number of proving passes 102 pressure 212 volume measurement 18 RFT9739 transmitter access to meter information 57 block diagram density 227 mass flow 209 Coriolis flowmeter 3 custody transfer 35. 228 mass flow 211 prover volume 19 volume 242 zero offset 216 Transfer standard proving 30–32.

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

.

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

- Uncertainties in the Calculation
- Chromatography
- EIL Spec for Instrumentation Works
- 011_ Fundamentals Meter Provers
- MPMS 5.6 - Coriolis Flow meter.pdf
- Cth Version 4.00 - February 2015
- Maaleforskriften
- Fusible Plug Loop Panel1
- BP_Measurement Manual PART1
- API Mpms Chapters
- Instrproving Coriolis for Custody
- coriolis knowledge - emerson.pdf
- GFO TM
- lejislacion
- List Standards in Flow Metering
- Yokogawa, Test and Measurement Magazine 2015
- SI030911A AV2501019
- ISO IEC 17020 Inspection Standard Application Document
- Mandatory Records for ISO9001 2008
- C721-15
- As NZS 1301.403s-2006 Methods of Test for Pulp and Paper Bursting Strength of Paper
- RP_311 Turbine Meter
- BSI.pdf
- 62100811_Inspection and Testing
- 700pck
- Elster Encal 3000
- 1551A Ex_1552A Ex BR
- QAP-09 Equipment Calibration
- elcometer
- CGA C-1-2009

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading