Comparison of technical performance of vortex flowmeter brands from abroad

Measuring steam comes first; for other measurements, the conditions at the site need to be taken into account. Mainly, if there is significant vibration at the site, it’s not possible to use that method

Could you tell me which ones are relatively good available in China?

Master Wang can give the original poster whatever score he wants, but he can’t say that the content is good. You still conduct research on vortex street phenomena. For example, is it easy to ensure the accuracy of insert-type vortex flow meters? Even pipeline types present difficulties, let alone insertable types. From a measurement principle perspective, it is hard to ensure that the flow velocity at a single point is representative, not to mention the disturbance to the flow field that occurs once insertion takes place. Furthermore, for a range ratio of 100:1, it is likely that only electromagnetic and mass-based methods will work; vortex flow meters are probably not feasible in this context, as it’s determined by the principles involved. Since it’s mentioned as 100:1, it must have comprehensive industrial applications and a certain range of use; more importantly, it needs to possess accuracy across the entire measurement range. If many of the readings are false signals, then is it actually measuring vibration or flow rate? The range that I know about right now – the highest quality and most reliable one is from Yokogawa; as for other domestic and foreign brands, I’ll just hear what they have to say first.

It’s not feasible to achieve a certain range ratio at the vortex street inlet

I am very grateful for all of your comments and opinions. This shows that everyone is still very interested in the practical application of vortex flowmeters, and has different views and understandings regarding some issues. By expressing these views, it is hoped that you can learn from them and clarify any doubts. Thank you! Regarding the opinions of my friends, I would like to present my own views, and I hope everyone can offer their judgment: First of all, the technical parameters and features listed above are based on the official specifications provided by various manufacturers for their vortex flow meter products; as for the accuracy of these data, different people may have different opinions, and I am unable to determine whether the data is accurate or not. Privately speaking, I personally have quite high regard for these major brand companies. After all, for a company to reach its current level of success, its reputation and brand reputation serve as a guarantee; the public information available is also convincing. I believe these companies certainly wouldn’t want to incur unnecessary legal troubles by exaggerating certain technical specifications. Secondly, regarding the issue of traffic range ratio that some friends have raised, my view on this is as follows: we cannot assume that something does not exist or cannot be achieved just because we have not applied it in practice, as everyone’s knowledge is always limited. Science and technology are advancing at an astonishing pace, with new knowledge and products emerging continuously. Some of these new products are indeed something we have never seen before, and even our existing ways of thinking hinder our willingness to accept them. To give a simple example, when it comes to orifice plates, everyone working with flow meters is familiar with them; they have been in use for a hundred years. Over these hundred years, an endless array of new products based on the differential pressure principle have emerged. When it comes to the range ratio of flow meters based on the differential pressure principle, I guess most people would say 3:1 or 10:1. But when it is said that the range ratio of orifice plates using this principle can reach 100:1, not many people will believe it. But just because you don’t believe it doesn’t mean such products don’t exist; the Spixar GilfloILVA differential pressure flow meter achieves a maximum range ratio of 100:1. However, due to their high cost, most companies do not use these flowmeters, which is why many people are not familiar with them. Additionally, some friends shared their views on the accuracy of vortex street sensors. We know that, with very few exceptions, most flowmeters require certain distances for the straight sections of pipe before and after the installation point in order to ensure accuracy; in addition, there are also requirements regarding the concentricity and smoothness of the pipe. Due to space constraints, we are unable to list and argue them. In short, flow meter measurement is very complex, involving a wide range of disciplines and knowledge areas. I truly hope that on the Haichuan platform, everyone can learn together and improve together.

Reminder: 1. To compete in the Chinese market, even established imported brands have to adapt to local practices. If you don’t believe it, you can find out secretly – many products overstate their features in the instructions; claiming a higher range is just one example of this. If you don’t blow when others do, you have no choice but to follow the common practice. Some rather odd precision levels were also created in this way. 2. Don’t worry; blowing a flow meter won’t lead to legal problems. As for why, think about it yourself. 3. The vortex street principle determines that the range ratio cannot be too large. Even if it is large, its significance is not fundamental, and it is not a fundamental breakthrough in principle. There are domestic manufacturers that produce gauges with a range ratio of 100:1. I wonder in what applications such gauges are used, and how can it be proven that they are suitable for use? How many of the values obtained through nonlinear measurement are repeatable and acceptable? Is it worthwhile and plausible to expend a large amount of energy in the sonic speed regime? I have N alternative solutions to replace it, so why insist on using vortex flow meters? 4. The orifice plate used by Spayshark simply adjusts its aperture automatically according to the flow rate range. It’s not either a breakthrough in fundamental principles. I’ve heard that some manufacturers have used it with poor results, and it makes sense – a spring that operates repeatedly in high-temperature environments faces issues such as sticking, problems with response time, and instability in its stiffness coefficient. I wouldn’t use it unless it’s absolutely necessary.

Mark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mr. Zhang, in my humble opinion, a ratio of 100:1 is achievable, but of course there are prerequisites for that; it’s completely impossible if it’s a liquid. If it is steam, the minimum measurement is 1 m/s and the maximum is 100 m/s. Several factors determine the range ratio of vortex flow meters: 1. It needs to be low for measuring small flow rates, and excellent interference resistance is required. 2. It is necessary to be able to measure high flow rates, which requires the sensor to be robust – having a high resonance frequency to prevent breakage. 3. The electronic circuit for detecting signals has a wide frequency band. As for how to ensure accuracy, there are many more related aspects, which will not be explained one by one. Of course, when talking about the range ratio, it’s necessary to specify what the accuracy is across the entire range; otherwise, it’s just nonsense.