To measure compressed air flow, is it better to use vortex flow meters or anemometers with differential pressure?
Thread Content
When measuring compressed air flow, is it better to use vortex flow meters or anemometers with differential pressure? Equipped with temperature and pressure compensation. For accuracy, both specify that 1% can be achieved. I’m considering that vortex flow meters are highly affected by vibrations, that pitot tubes have strict requirements regarding their installation location, and that it’s difficult to determine the appropriate depth of insertion into the pipe. In terms of price, the difference between the two should be small.
A spiral vortex flowmeter or a porous orifice plate flowmeter can also be used for measurement
Yes, I was wondering that if I have to choose one, which one would be better.
Spin into the vortex – it features built-in temperature and pressure compensation, displays instantaneous and cumulative gas consumption on-site, and is easy to install. It has better seismic performance than vortex flowmeters, a lower flow rate threshold compared to ordinary domestic vortex flowmeters, and better stability.
The diameter of the compressed air pipe shouldn’t be too large; generally, there shouldn’t be much vibration either. So, use vortex flow meters. From what I remember, pitot tubes are used only because their diameter is extremely large. Of course, we can talk about variants of pitot tubes; various type B flow meters work as well.
Select the vortex boundary. It is possible to reduce the diameter, and a smaller diameter can increase the lower limit of measurement. For bar-type meters, the resulting pressure difference is small, and the flow rate must be taken to the square root; moreover, it is not possible to reduce the pipe diameter in order to increase the flow speed and thus raise the pressure difference reading. Under the same conditions, the actual accuracy of vortex-type meters is higher than that of bar-type meters. The Baibiao is primarily used as a replacement for large-diameter venturi tubes/electromagnetic flowmeters, offering a price advantage.
1. Using a swirl vortex meter to measure compressed air is definitely better than a vortex street meter; it offers superior measurement range and lower limit detection capabilities, as well as better resistance to vibrations. However, swirl vortex meters can only be used for diameters up to DN200. 2. For larger diameters, bar-type transmitters can be considered; before making the choice, it is essential to ensure that the flow rate is not too low, as otherwise the differential pressure will be very small, making it difficult for the transmitter to take accurate measurements and resulting in an inability to detect low flow rates. 3. For large diameters, low flow rates and slow velocities, an orifice plate can be considered; it is both inexpensive and reliable.
I feel that there are more vortex street meters available from manufacturers in the market compared to those of the swirl type, offering a wider range of options; companies like Emerson, Yokogawa, and Kolon all produce vortex street meters, whereas swirl-type meters are relatively fewer in number.
It is widely used by Spinning Vortex oil and gas companies. There are more manufacturers that produce vortex street sensors compared to those that produce progressive vortex sensors, and design institutes are also more familiar with the design of the former. In fact, in many cases, a reduced diameter is required when using vortex street sensors, while progressive vortex sensors are suitable for such situations. Our factory produces both types of flow meters.
The thermal mass flow meter is the preferred choice: it is easy to install, has a wide measurement range, causes no pressure loss, and is not affected by vibrations. 13371984667 Microelectric