FlowControl Network Page 1 of 7

Free Product Information

Click here to use our NEW online
Reader Service and request product
information directly from our featured vendors!
Frida

FREE SUBSCRIPTION
ARTICLE ARCHIVES
CURRENT CONTENT
NEXT ISSUE
SUBMISSIONS ARTICLE ARCHIVES Home
ADVISORY BOARD
CONTACT STAFF Differential Pressure
PAST ISSUES Run New Search
EDITORIAL CALENDAR
ADVERTISING INDEX
by: Steven Rogers
Pages: 32-37; July, 1999

2003 Process Industries

Exposition
Differential Pressure is the oldest and most widely used method of measuring
March March 31 - April 2, 2003 flow in a pipe. According to recent market studies1,2, in 1997, about half of all
New Orleans, LA industrial flow measurements were made with some type of differential
INTERPHEX producer and an accompanying DP measurement. The next most common
March March 31 - April 2, 2003
New York, NY flow technology is used in less than 15 percent of flow measurements3.
2003 Offshore Technology
Conference
May 5-8
Over the past few years, DP flow has been threatened by newer flow
Houston, TX technologies. Vortex, electromagnetic, Coriolis, and ultrasonic flowmeters •A
AWWA experienced significant growth since reliable meters have become available. •C
June 15-19 But if new technologies are so much better, why have DP flowmeters remained
Anaheim, CA so popular? If the newer technologies are as good as we hear, why haven't the •F
Semicon West •F
July 14-16 orifice plate, nozzle, venturi, and averaging pitot tube markets dried up?
San Francisco, CA •G
Search for More Events
DP flow continues to be so popular not because the flowmeter industry is •L
entrenched in tradition, or process engineers are resistant to change, it is likely • M
because of value. There are a number of reasons why -- application flexibility, •P
standardization, accuracy, rangeability, flexible permanent pressure loss, meter
interchangeability, and ease of calibration.
•P
•P
•R
F
•S
Application Flexibility
•S
•S
With a wide variety of primary elements available, DP flowmeters can be
engineered to fit a larger percentage of flow measurements than any other flow •S
technology. Other flowmeters have restrictions on line size, process fluids, or •T
temperature, making them impossible to use for all flow measurements. •T
•V
One of the most common pieces of equipment to be found in any process plant
is a boiler. A boiler normally requires flow measurements to be made on large
combustion air inlet lines, smaller natural gas supply lines, high-temperature
steam lines, and condensate returns. Even something as common as an
industrial boiler would be difficult to instrument using any other single flow
technology.

Another flexibility advantage unique to DP flow is the ability to customize the

flow range without changing the meter size. By changing the bore size of an

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 2 of 7

orifice, the flowmeter maximum can be adjusted over a range of 17 to one,

without changing the pipe size or the DP measuring device. This advantage is
common in applications where the flow rate changes seasonally over a wide
range. It is also useful in experimental applications and pilot plants where
process lines are frequently converted for use in a variety of applications.

Standardization

The use of orifices, nozzles, and venturis is standardized by at least three

organizations: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME),
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and American Gas
Association (AGA). The industry standards play an important role in
establishing flowmeter accuracy and reducing metering costs. In order to meet
the accuracy requirements of the market, all flowmeters rely on some type of
empirical testing to improve accuracy. For vortex, electromagnetic, Coriolis,
and ultrasonic flowmeters, this testing is done for each unit separately in a flow
laboratory.

Due the large body of data available on orifices, nozzles, and venturis,
equations have been developed, which describe the empirical correction factor
for all primary elements manufactured in accordance with the standard.

Because consumers can rely on these industry standards to guarantee the

accuracy of DP flowmeters, they are seldom calibrated in a flow lab. The
accuracy of the flowmeter is verified by the standard rather than a flow lab.
This results in a significant cost reduction for the consumer.

Standardization serves as the basis for many custody transfer measurements.

All of the installation, calculation, and uncertainty variables are outlined in the
industry standard. The buyer and seller can agree that the metering is to be
done per a specific industry standard rather than spelling out all of the details,
reducing costs.

Accuracy

It has been a common misconception that the technology of primary and

secondary elements has not seen any new advances since the pneumatic DP
transmitter of the 1950s. Most concerns expressed are about orifice plates
because they are, by far, the most common primary element. A good portion of
consumers can recite that the accuracy of an orifice flowmeter system is one to
three percent of full scale. That may have been true in 1955, but technology
has come a long way since then. Today, a system accuracy of 0.5 to one
percent of flow rate is possible in most applications. This can be achieved
using a multivariable transmitter that is capable of full dynamic flow calculation.
For a complete discussion of how this accuracy is accomplished, see the
Wiklund/Engelstad paper in the references.4

Another popular perception is that the inaccuracy comes from the orifice itself,
not the secondary instrumentation. In fact, the orifice plate is the most
accurate, uncalibrated primary element available. According to ASME or ISO,
the uncertainty of the orifice plate is 0.6 to 0.75percent uncalibrated.5,6 The
AGA standard gives 0.44 to 0.72 percent accuracy for an uncalibrated orifice at
pipe Reynolds numbers over 20,0007. The orifice itself is certainly accurate
enough to achieve an overall flow accuracy in the range of 0.5 to one percent

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 3 of 7

of flow rate.

DP flowmeters also have an inherent accuracy advantage over flowmeters that

measure velocity. In gas flow measurements, changes in fluid density with
static pressure and temperature variation are a significant source of flowmeter
error. In order to save metering costs and reduce complexity, many gas flow
measurements are not compensated for these changes and density is
assumed to be constant. This assumption causes additional error for any
velocity-based measurement (vortex, magnetic, turbine, or ultrasonic), DP
flowmeter measuring mass, or standard volume flow. The advantage of DP
flowmeters is that the error caused by density variation will only be half that of
a meter that measures velocity. This is because the density term is under the
square root in the flow equation.8,9

Rangeability

Rangeability is usually stated as the ratio of maximum to minimum flow. There

are two definitions of maximum flow, which are commonly used in specifying
the rangeability of a flowmeter.

It is important to understand the difference between the two methods of

defining the maximum flow. It can mean the difference between a flowmeter
that can measure the flow range of interest, and one that cannot. The first way
to define maximum flow is the maximum flow rate that the flowmeter can
measure. This is how the newer flowmeters specify rangeability in their sales
literature.

The other way to define the maximum flow is the maximum flow rate that
actually occurs in a particular application. This is how most DP flowmeters are
specified.

A distinction is critical because the meter maximum is often two to three times
the application maximum. Vortex, Coriolis, magnetic, and ultrasonic flowmeters
are designed to measure maximum flow rates at 20 to 30 ft/sec. in liquids. The
optimum economic flowing velocity for most liquids is about five to six ft/sec.10,
and they rarely flow over 10 ft/sec. This means that a flowmeter with a 20 or 30
to one rangeability specified from meter maximum is likely to measure less
than a 10 to one flow range in a typical process. Meter maximum flows are
similarly high for gas flows, although there is much more variation in the
maximum due to the wider variation in gas density.

The only way to achieve the advertised rangeability in a typical application is to

reduce the pipe size, which increases the velocity. Reducing the pipe size also
increases installation costs and permanent pressure loss, which may not be
acceptable for the user. For this reason, flowmeter rangeability should be
considered from application maximum, not the specified maximum flow.

It is also important to understand how the maximum to minimum flow ratio

relates to percent of the flow range. Figure 2 shows the relationship between
rangeability and percent of maximum flow.

Although 20 to one rangeability seems like twice as much as 10 to one, it

actually only measures five percent more of the flow range, down to five
percent of maximum, rather than 10 percent. Since a meter with a high
rangeability can significantly increase cost, care should be taken to specify no
more rangeability than will actually be required in a particular application.

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 4 of 7

The orifice plate has traditionally been regarded as having a maximum

rangeability of three to one or four to one. As with accuracy, this rangeability
limitation is perceived to come from the orifice plate itself, not the secondary
instrumentation. This limitation was a result of the DP transmitters of the day
and is long outdated.

With a properly selected orifice and a modern DP transmitter, a rangeability of

five to one to as high as eight to one is certainly possible. With a multivariable
measurement and full dynamic compensation, typical rangeability is from six to
one to 15 to one with better than one percent of rate accuracy over the entire
range11.

Combining this multivariable rangeability with the ability to interchange orifice

plates, a flow range of 200 to one can be measured without changing the pipe
size or the transmitter.

Permanent Pressure Loss

Permanent pressure loss is always considered by vendors when comparing

their flowmeters, yet permanent pressure loss may not have any impact at all
on cost savings or process efficiency.

When considering the permanent pressure loss of different flowmeters, the first
question to ask is "Will the pressure be lost somewhere else in the process?"
In some applications, there is a regulator or pressure regulating valve
downstream, or a flow control valve where line pressure will drop to maintain
the desired flow or pressure. In these cases, there is no energy saved. If a
flowmeter with a lower permanent pressure loss is used, the permanent
pressure loss through the regulating device must be higher to maintain the set
point.

For applications where there is a real energy savings in lowering the

permanent pressure loss, DP flow offers a variety of solutions that can meet
the requirements. Venturis and averaging pitot tubes have a permanent
pressure loss among the lowest available. Only magnetic flowmeters and
ultrasonic flowmeters have lower losses.

The permanent pressure loss of the orifice is not among the lowest available,
but it is also not as high as often portrayed. Besides, the permanent pressure
loss of an orifice plate is adjustable. It can be made as low or as high as
required, although a lower permanent pressure loss generally means lower
rangeability.

In days gone by, practically all orifice plates were sized to produce 100 in H2O
DP. This was done for convenience of calculating square roots, for ease of
calibration, and because higher DP's were necessary to be measured
accurately by transmitters of the day. This practice resulted in a permanent
pressure loss of 46 to 96 in water (1.7 - 3.5 psi).

With advances in smart transmitter technology and characterization to enhance

accuracy, sizing to 100 in water is no longer necessary. With today's
transmitters, orifices can be sized to produce 20 to 50 in water DP and still
achieve better accuracy than in the past. These lower differential pressures will
cause only nine to 48 in water (0.3 - 1.7 psi) permanent pressure loss, an
acceptable loss in most applications.

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 5 of 7

For other flowmeters, a reduction in line size is often recommended by

flowmeter suppliers in order to achieve the desired rangeability. In these cases,
it is important that the permanent pressure loss through the reducer, expander,
and the length of smaller pipe be included when comparing the permanent
pressure loss of such a meter to one that does not require a line size reduction.
The permanent pressure loss due to a line size reduction is almost never
included in the sizing calculations for a flowmeter. Many times, the loss through
the reduced section is as much as the loss through the meter itself.

Meter Interchangeability

All DP flowmeters share one piece of equipment in common -- differential

pressure measuring devices. In industrial flow measurements that device is
almost always a DP transmitter. This DP transmitter is completely
interchangeable across all flowmeters of approximately the same DP range. By
stocking just a few different ranges of a transmitter, spares for all of the DP
flowmeters in the facility are on hand. These spares can also be combined with
the spares for many DP level and other pressure measurements to reduce
inventory and maintenance training costs even further.

By contrast, the transmitter portion for any of the newer flow technologies is
specific to the manufacturer and sometimes to a certain model by that
manufacturer.

The primary element of DP flowmeters can yield significant inventory savings.

General primary elements are reliable and long lasting because of their
simplicity. The useful life of a venturi, nozzle, or averaging pitot tube is
practically endless.

Orifice plates are reportedly prone to wear over a short period of time, but
excessive wear is normally due to misapplication. Dirty, abrasive, or corrosive
processes are probably better suited to another primary element.

Orifice plates may eventually wear out. In a clean process, this takes a very
long time. If they do wear, it causes only an accuracy shift, not a loss of the
measurement.

Because of their popularity and simplicity, orifice plates can be purchased and
shipped in very short order, reducing inventory requirements. For critical
processes, spare orifice plates can be kept on hand at a much lower cost than
Coriolis, magnetic, vortex, or ultrasonic primary sections.

Calibration

Almost all instruments need to be calibrated to maintain product quality, ISO

certification, or custody transfer verification. Although newer flowmeter
technologies may require calibration less frequently than a DP flowmeter,
calibration of a DP flowmeter is by far the least expensive. Because the
accuracy of primary elements is verified by industry standards, a few
dimensional measurements or even a visual inspection can verify that they are
still within the specified accuracy. The measurements of DP, static pressure,
and temperature can be verified by equipment found in most instrument shops,
often without even removing the instrument. For a more thorough calibration
the transmitter can be sent back to the manufacturer and re-calibrated. Even a

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 6 of 7

thorough, NIST traceable calibration normally costs a fraction of the price of a

flow lab calibration.

All of this is not to say that other flowmeters do not have their advantages. All
flowmeters have unique advantages that make them well suited for particular
applications. Other flowmeters should be selected on their own merits, not
because DP flow is misrepresented. DP flow is certainly one of the oldest
methods of measuring flow, but with modern innovations it certainly isn't
obsolete.

References

World Sensor Technology Assessment: Pressure, Flow and Level, Frost &
Sullivan, 1996.

Ultrasonic Flowmeter Worldwide Outlook: Market Analysis and Forecast

through 2001, Automation Research Corporation, August 1997.

World Sensor Technology Assessment, ibid.

Wiklund, David E. and Engelstad, Loren M., Improving Flow Measurement by

Real-Time Flow Calculation in Transmitters Having Multiple Process Variables,
Advances in Instrumentation and Control vol. 50, part 2, International Society
for Measurement and Control, pp. 653-662, Oct. 1-6, 1995.

ASME/ANSI MFC-3M-1989, Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice,

Nozzle, and Venturi.

ISO 5167-1, Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure differential

devices, Part 1 Orifice plates, nozzles and venturi tubes inserted in circular
cross-section conduits running full, Dec. 15, 1991.

AGA Report No. 3, Orifice Metering of Natural Gas and Other Related
Hydrocarbons, Part 1 General Equations and Uncertainty Guidelines, Third
Edition, Oct. 1990, American Gas Association.

ASME MFC-3M, ibid.

AGA Report No. 3, ibid.

Capps, R.W. Selecting an Economic Optimum Pipe Size, Flow Control, Apr.
1998.

Wiklund, ibid.

About the Author

Steven B. Rogers has a BS degree in Mechanical Engineering from Brigham

Young University and is a member of ASME and ISA. He is currently an
application engineer at Rosemount Inc. (Eden Prairie, MN;
steven.rogers@frco.com) specializing in flow measurement and providing
companywide technical assistance.

Subscribe | Email | Site Map | Search | FAQ | Advertise

Copyright ©2002, Witter Publishing Corporation

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03
FlowControl Network Page 7 of 7

Email: FlowControl@WitterPublishing.com
Flow Control Network
is the technology
resource for the fluid
handling industry's
critical disciplines of
control, containment
and measurement. F
wi

http://www.flowcontrolnetwork.com/article_index.cfm?article=221 4/4/03