Thread Content
Three domestic mass flow meters, used for gasoline and diesel as the media. In all cases, the measured density was lower than the laboratory density. The diesel flow meter shows 0.80–0.82, while the laboratory data is 0.88. The density of the gasoline flow meter is 0.67–0.66, while the laboratory density is 0.71–0.72; the cumulative flow volume is also lower than that obtained through manual measurements in the tank area. All are pipelines with a diameter of 80, using flow meters with a capacity of 50; the gasoline flow rate is around 25 T/H. The diesel flow rate is around 10 T/H. No alarm for the header, and calibrating the zero point has no effect. What should be done next?
Just do what needs to be done. . . Find a manufacturer and replace the product. . .
The low density reading can be attributed to wear in the measuring tube, but for this type of medium, the possibility of wear is very low. Also, it is normal for there to be differences between the density measured in the laboratory at different temperatures and the density under actual operating conditions. For flow error, it depends on whether it is linear and whether there is repeatability.
This post was last edited by massflowmeter on 2016-6-21 09:24. Sorry, I deleted it myself.
Contact the manufacturer; it’s probably a problem with the calibration at the factory – they likely didn’t pay enough attention to the density value
1. The flow meter should not measure standard density, as the temperature measured is different from that in the laboratory. 2. If there is indeed a difference in density, it is recommended to first calibrate the flow meter to determine whether it is qualified
I wonder if the density measured has had its standard density converted; I think it’s more reliable to use a professional online density meter for measurements
The flow rate and density of the mass flow meter are measured separately. By how much is the traffic lower? Was the flow coefficient modified in the most recent inspection?