May 21, 2009: I would like to ask everyone, what is a good method for measuring the flow rate of acidic gases?
Thread Content
This post was last edited by adsl121 on 2009-5-22 01:44. In the Klaus sulfur recovery process, is it better to use an ultrasonic flow meter or a orifice plate for measuring the flow rate of acidic gases? Gas components: H2S, 22.19%; CO2, 75.3%; N2, 2.2%. Is there a better way to measure this?
I agree with the opinion from the second floor; it is best to use a V-cone flow meter. However, acid gas measurements should include temperature and pressure compensation; otherwise, there will definitely be errors in the measurements.
Could you explain why V-cone flow meters are used and what the advantages are?
Are there any disadvantages to ultrasound?
It is uncertain whether to use acid gas meters or ultrasonic devices, as ultrasonic instruments are non-contact types and are suitable for measuring fluids that are difficult to access and observe, as well as high-flow rates in large-diameter pipes. The V-cone flow meter is relatively inexpensive, which is its advantage.
We are using orifice plates – is there any problem with that? Zero drift?
I’m not sure who has used ultrasonic flowmeters to measure acidic gases; since the main components of such media are H2S and CO2, I wonder whether it is appropriate to use ultrasonic technology for measuring these mixed gases
Both orifice plates and V-cones can be used. Orifice plates result in higher pressure losses, while V-cones have lower pressure losses but less reliability compared to orifice plates. Orifice plates are cheaper to manufacture, whereas V-cones are more expensive. The required straight pipe section in front of a V-cone is shorter than that needed for an orifice plate
Our first set of sulfur systems was designed by foreigners, using ultrasound. The second set was made in China, and a V-shaped cone was chosen
It is said that ultrasonic waves are better, as they can directly measure the mass flow rate of the medium.