1_Designing Ultrasonic Flow Meters

7/27/2019 1_Designing Ultrasonic Flow Meters

1/183

Technical considerations in

designing ul trasonic flow

meters.

Jan G. Drenthen

Marcel Vermeulen &

Hilko den Hollander

KROHNE Oil & Gas


2/183

ALTOSONIC V12

6 paths with a single reflection in each path

No flow conditioner required

Integrated swirl compensation

ALTOSONIC V12-D

6 paths with direct mode

Flow conditioner required

For low pressure and high CO2

reflective and non-reflective designs.


3/183

3

Principle USM

cdVCOS

t

1-

t

1

2

l=v

baab

m

cos

DiL

Trd B

Trd A

send

receive

cos

vc

l=t

U

ba

cosv+c

l=t

D

ab

receive

send

Cu

v

baab t

1

t

1.

2

LC


4/183

4

Principe USM

t

1

-t

1

2

l

=vbaabcos

For US meters the velocity is only a function of the time

and the geometry of the meter body.

Therefore:

The measurement is independent from the fluid

properties.

The meter calibration is valid for use at all pressures. The meter curve is linear


5/183

5

Where do the fluid properties and pressure come into

play?

In the correction curve ifa Reynolds type correction is

used.

VD

..Re

Pressure:

In a correction factor of the meter, as described inChapter 4.7 (a unique feature of the 17089 !)


6/183

6

Reynolds dependent Flow profi le

Re < 10.000 Re = 1000.000


7/183

7

Reynolds correction as function of the path posit ion


8/183

8

Single path meter


9/183

9

Test result of a single path meter.

Lucky Shot 1:


10/183

10

NRLM certificate

Lucky Shot 2:


11/183

11

Flow profi le distortion


12/183

12

Lowest Uncertainty

Highest Reliability

What are the essential requirements for Custody Transfer meters?

Measurement accuracy (Typical technical data sheet)

Uncertainty

0.5% of measured value, uncalibrated

0.2% of measured value, high-pressure flow calibrated(relative to calibration laboratories)

0.1% of measured value, calibrated and linearized

Repeatability 0.1%

What you see is the top of the iceberg

Dont let datasheets mislead you!


13/183

13

The Ice berg specifications


14/183

14

Uncertainty

Non-linearity,

Repeatability

Due to Installation effects

Due to possible contamination

Iceberg specification

ISO 17089 + OIMLR 137

AGA 9

Expert systems

Calibration

Commissioning


15/183

15

ISO 17089

OIML R137

The transferability of the calibration curve to the field.

-0,50%

-0,40%

-0,30%

-0,20%

-0,10%

0,00%

0,10%

0,20%

0,30%

0,40%

0,50%

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

(Initial) Base 15 bar

Base15 bar FC

Base10 bar

Diameterstep +3%

Diameterstep -3%

Elbow 10D0deg

Elbow 10D90deg

OOP 10D 0deg

OOP 10D 90deg

OOP Exp.10D0deg

Base15 bar

REVERSE

Renewedbase 15bar2008-10-14

Elbow 10D0deg

Renewedbase 15barrepeat 2008-10-22-2,00%

-1,50%

-1,00%

-0,50%

0,00%

0,50%

1,00%

1,50%

2,00%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Uncertainty

2%

-2% -0,5%

0,5%

?

Ideal conditions Real conditions

ISO 17089 A meter calibration curve without the guarantee that the meterbehaves the same way in the field as at the calibration facility is meaningless


16/183

16

-0.8 %

-0.6 %

-0.4 %

-0.2 %

0.0 %

0.2 %

0.4 %

0.6 %

0.8 %

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Diff

erence

Diff. %

U (K=1)U (K=2)

U (K=3)U (K=4)

How does contamination over time affects the meter performance?

Performance

Monitoring

-2,00%

-1,50%

-1,00%

-0,50%

0,00%

0,50%

1,00%

1,50%

2,00%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Uncertainty

Ideal conditions Real conditions

?

The quality of measurement over time.


17/183

17

Fundamentally, after the calibration 2 vital questions remain:

How can we guarantee that the meter behaves the same way in the field

as in the calibration facility?

How can one be assured that the meter performance is not deteriorated

by fouling?


18/183

18

Why highest possible accuracy?

Because we measure billions of

and accountants appreciate lowest uncertainty.

$

Accuracy


19/183

19

The Netherlands: Production CT metering: 8x 24

Examples of metering stations


20/183

20

Examples of metering stations

Left:

GERMANY: gas import1x 30, 2x 20, 2x 16

Right:OMAN: LNG feed4x 16


21/183

21

Money involved at large metering stations


22/183

22

The minimum you could lose


23/183

Pay back time

23

At 0.1%, the payback time of the meters is within a few number of weeks.

So the decision on the measurement should be made on the performance

rather than on the lowest price.

Dutch saying:

The bitter taste of a poor performance lasts longer than the sweet taste of a

cheap buy.


24/183

24

Accuracy depends on:

Acoustic path configuration

The number of paths

The calculation schedule of individual paths

Major issues are:

Profile distortion

Swirl

Multi-path Flow Meter Configuration


25/183

Meter design

1. Using mathematics dating from the 1830s (such as used in the Westinghouse patent from 1968 and stillapplied in many parallel paths meters).

And / or..

25

Gauss J acobi Legendre Chebyshev

In selecting the acoustic path configuration there are 2 possibilities:

2. by applying flow research and using physical models such as CFD. Only then thetechnology can progress.

CFD goal: the creation of a flow profile database


26/183

26

Flow calculation models

CFD:

Results depend on:

the boundary conditions

the calculation grid

Results always look nice, but

experiments are always necessary.


27/183

27

Flow calculation models


28/183

28

Flow profi le distortions

Reducer tests at the University of Erlangen


29/183

29

Laboratory tests

Reducer tests at the University of Erlangen


30/183

Laser Doppler and CFD calculation

30

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10

0.5

1

1.5

r/R [-]

v/vgem[-]

Position x: 0R

Disturbed profile 5.5 D after a single 45 bending

measured in a 135 plane

Measured LDA

Theory (30% and 0.6R)


31/183

31

Analyt ical model

Theoretical models:

- Undisturbed fully developed pipe flow t heory- Mathematical hydrodynamic disturbance

functions

- Wall roughness theory

- Cavity correction theory

- Flow integration scheme

Input:

- Experimental LDA/PIV Data

- Geometrical parameters

- Hydrodynamic parameters

(e.g. Reynolds number)

Computation:

Path positi on optimization

Final design-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

r/R [-]

v/vgem[

-]

Position x: 0R

Disturbed profile 5.5 D after a single 45 bending

measured in a 135 plane

Measured LDA

Theory (30% and 0.6R)


32/183

32

Analytical model

Example of path sensitivity calculation for a 4 path meter for

30+ different pipe configurations

Offset mean error axial disturbances relative to a fully developed pipe flow

-0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Position Path xR [-]

Offseterror[%]

IV beam


33/183

33

Analytical model

Offset mean error axial disturbances relative to a fully developed pipe flow

-0.5

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Position Path xR [-]

Offseterror[%]

V beam

Example of path sensitivity calculation for a 5 path meter for

30+ different pipe configurations


34/183

34

Example of 4 possible configurations

4 Beam 12 Chordsversion 1

12 Chordsversion 2

Laminar flowTurbulent flow

Multipath configurations

Triangelmodel


35/183

Profile distortion


36/183

36

Distortions in compliance with

10D

10D

5D

5D

SB Re/Ex DBooP

ISO17089

80D

80D

0D

0D

OIML R137

DBooP/Ex DBooP/Ex/HMP


37/183

37

Schematic layout

Testing in Lintorf

Total uncertainty: 0,3%

Repeatability: 0,1%


38/183

38

Testing in Lintorf


39/183

39

Straight path and reflective path tests

V12_d

V12


40/183

Straight path: ideal flow profile

40


41/183

Straight path: Flow profile after a single bend

41


42/183

42

Straight path Crossed or reflective path


43/183

Straight path: Flow profile Double out-of-plane bend

43


44/183

44

0,0%

0,1%

0,2%

0,3%

0,4%

0,5%

0,6%

0,7%

0,8%

0,9%

3 criss-crossed

chords

4 criss-crossed

chords

3 parallelchords

5 criss-crossed

chords

4/5 parallelchords

5-pathtriangle

8 chordscrossed in-

plane

12-Vchords

crossed in-

plane

Path Configuration

EstimatedUncertainty(%)

V12 meter

Flow Profile Effects (no swirl)Gregor Brown: NEL conference 2006, KL.


45/183

Swirl +

-0


46/183

46

Chord configurations

Paths in the

same direction

Criss-

crossed

Triangle

model

V 12

technology


47/183

47

Swirl comes in 2variations

After a

singlebend

After a

double out-of-plane

bend

The swirl velocity vector at the bottom changes in direction !


48/183

48

Flow profile distortion and swirl


49/183

49

Swirl elimination in each of the individual measurement planes


50/183

50

Swirl elimination

Reflective or crossed -technology


51/183

Difference between in-plane and out-of-plane designs

In-plane designs have 2 chords in the same

horizontal plane to completely eliminate the

swirl.

Out-of-plane designs have the cords which

are supposedly aimed to compensate for the

swirl at the different positions in the vertical

plane.

The paths do not cross in the same horizontal

plane.

51


52/183

Difference between in-plane and out-of-plane designs

In-plane designs have 2 chords in the same

horizontal plane to completely eliminate the

swirl.

Out-of-plane designs have the cords which

are supposedly aimed to compensate for the

swirl at the different positions in the vertical

plane.

The paths do not cross in the same horizontal

plane.

52


53/183

53

Out-of-plane chord designs

Out-of-plane chord designs try to compensate for the swirl by combining

cords at the same radius position.

Bottom pathchanges in direction

Paths in same direction Paths in criss-crossarrangement.


54/183

54

2 parallel chords in detail, paths in same direction

-

+

-

-


55/183

Ideal swirl profile Real swirl profile

Swirl compensation with out-of-plane paths(paths in same direction)

++

--

++

-


56/183

56

2 parallel chords in detail, in a criss-cross arrangement

+

+

+

-


57/183

Ideal swirl profile Real swirl profile

Swirl compensation with out-of-plane paths(paths criss-crossed)

++

++

+++

+

Th diff b t i l d i d th f i ti


58/183

58

The difference between in plane and criss-crossed path conf igurations

Each of them is optimized for either:

. a single bend configuration

. or for a double out-of-plane bend

. But neither of them can handle both !

. Both are unsuitable for non symmetrical

swirl

The only way to overcome these problems is by eliminating the swirl in

each of the individual the measurement planes


59/183

The impact of Swirl on the measurement result in practice

High level swirl test

Low level swirl in an official AGA9 Meter run

Bill Frasier, Ceesi

Ceesi Colorado Springs Ultrasonic Workshop 2011

59


60/183

60

Benchmark ultrasonic gas f low meters 20 /DN500

Archive photo: GL Flow Centre Bishop Auckland


61/183

Participants

61

UFM i d i th G t t


62/183

62

Out-of-plane

swirl compensation

UFMs in compared in the Gazprom test.

In-plane swirl elimination

Latest model

Z k fl diti t f 28D t i ht i


63/183

Zanker flow conditioner upstream of a 28D straight pipe

PTB plate, swirl angle 45

Zanker flow profiler Fully developed flow (ideal conditions)

Disturbed flow with swirl (mimicking Header + Tees)


64/183

Real world conditions: Header with 2 Tees

Courtesy: 64CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics

T t t Bi h A kl d


65/183

Test set-up Bishop Auckland 20 (DN500) / ANSI600 / natural gas @ 40 bar

13D = 6.5m28D = 13.9mMeter 1 Meter 2

Meters 1 & 2

ideal conditions

ideal conditions

swirl

Meters 3, 4 & 5ideal conditions

swirl

Real world conditions with swirl:

Ideal conditions:

Meters 3, 4 & 5

Meters 1 & 2


66/183

-1

-0,8

-0,6

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

m3/h

%

erro

r

0,36%

0,61%

Test 1

Test 2

M1

M1 M2

M2

Test 2, meter2Test 1, meter2

Test 1, meter1

Test 2, meter1

Ideal conditions: Meters 1 & 2

Meter 1 showed irregular behavior even under ideal conditions


67/183

-1

-0,8

-0,6

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

m3/h

%

error

0,36%

0,61%

-1

-0,8

-0,6

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

m3/h

%

erro

r

0,36%

0,61%

Test 1

Test 2 R SM1 M2

M1 M2

M1, Test 2 repeatafternoon

M1, Test 1 morning

M1, Test 1 repeatafternoon

M1, Test 2 morning

Meter 1 showed irregular behavior even under ideal conditions

Meter M1 suffered from irregular baseline behavior and was

therefore disqualified

Ideal condit ions: all manufacturers (scale 1%)


68/183

-1,00

-0,80

-0,60

-0,40

-0,20

0,00

0,20

0,40

0,60

0,80

1,00

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000%

m3/h

Ideal condit ions: all manufacturers (scale 1%)

Test 2 M1 M2

Test 5 M3 M4 M5

M3M2

M4

M1

M5

rejected on irregular baseline behavior

Real world conditions; flow with swirl (scale + 7 5 to 20%)


69/183

-20,00

-17,50

-15,00

-12,50

-10,00

-7,50

-5,00

-2,50

0,00

2,50

5,00

7,50

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

%

m3/h


69

Real world conditions; flow with swirl (scale + 7.5 to - 20%)

Test 3 M1 M2

Test 4 M3 M4 M5

M1

M3

M2

M4M5

Out-of-planeswirl compensation


In-planeswirl elimination

Real world conditions; flow with swirl (scale 5%)


70/183

-5,00

-4,00

-3,00

-2,00

-1,00

0,00

1,00

2,00

3,00

4,00

5,00

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000%

m3/h


In-plane swirl elimination

70

Real world conditions; flow with swirl (scale 5%)

Test 3 M1 M2

Test 4 M3 M4 M5


KROHNE V12

M2

M4

M1

M5

Summary


71/183

71

Summary

swirl

The KROHNE ALTOSONIC V12 is the only ultrasonic gas flow meter that measures within

custody transfer limits even under very strong swirl conditions.

Flow profile scan at five levels Swirl elimination in each measuring plane

-2,00

-1,00

0,00

1,00

2,00

0,00 2000,00 4000,00 6000,00 8000,00 10000,00 12000,00

%

KROHNE V12


72/183

Southstream countries involved

72


73/183

Southstream facts / Timeline

73


74/183

Southstream gas measurement

Russian terminal (near Anapa)

4 measuring lines 16, each 2 UFM in series, ANSI2500 pressure rating

Bulgarian terminal (near Varna)

4 measuring lines 16, each 2 UFM in series, ANSI2500 pressure rating

74

Performance of an out of plane swirl meter in an official AGA9 meter run


75/183

75

Performance of an out of plane swirl meter in an official AGA9 meter run.

Bill FrasierCeesi Ultrasonic Workshop

Colorado Springs 2011

10D

Flow

straightener

Out-of-planeswirlcompensating

meter

The official recommendedAGA meter run


76/183

76

Real conditions: CFD of header with 2 Tees


77/183

Real conditions: CFD of header with 2 Tee s.

Courtesy:CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics

Comment fromCPA:

The CPA platetakes

approximately95% of the swirl.

But there is stillsome swirlremaining!

This results in asubstantial shift

of the metererror.


78/183

Real conditions: CFD of header with 2 Tees

Courtesy:CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics

Comment fromCPA:

The CPA platetakes

approximately95% of the swirl.

But there is stillsome swirlremaining!

This results in asubstantial shift

of the metererror.

No straight lines!

There is stillsome swirlpresent.

Flow pattern in the north run in the field; clockwise deposit


79/183

79

p ; p

Flow pattern in the south run in the field; counter- clockwise deposit


80/183

80

p p

Measurement error of the out-of-plane swir l compensating meter.


81/183

81

p p g

Conclusions on swirl


82/183

Meters having their swirl compensation not in the same plane of

measurement are very vulnerable to high swirl levels such as can beencountered in real world conditions.

Even if its design is theoretically compensating for a certain swirl type, slight

asymmetries in the flow can result in large measurement errors. Therefore

out-of-plane designs should always be installed with a flow conditioner,

reducing the swirl.

Even when mounted into an official AGA9 meter run, including a flow

straightener, the additional measurement error of an out-of-plane meter is still

in the order of 0.3% to 0.4%. This means that the highest attainable OIM

Class for such meters is Class 1.

Only by in-plane swirl correction the impact of swirl can be totally cancelledout and an OIML classification 0.5 can be achieved using 5 measurement

planes.

82


83/183

Final path configuration

Velocity profi le changes


84/183

84


85/183

2 stable profile

supports at 0.5R

85

Flow profile correction with KROHNE

3additional

pathsfor

correctingthe impact

ofprofile

distortions

ALTOSONIC V12; The Power of Reflection


86/183

86

Item Benefit Drawback

Doubling the pathlength

Higher accuracy less suitable forhigh CO2

applications

more powerful

transducers

Swirl In the plane swirl

elimination.

none

Multipoint

interrogation of the

pipe wall

Detection of fouling

Assuring

measurement

quality

(expert system)

none


87/183

87

OIML R137

ALTOSONIC V12: the onlyUSM within class 0,5


88/183

Transducer selection

Transducers


89/183

89

. There is not a one-first-all solution.

. Transducers have to be chosen dependent on the application.

Key selection cri teria:

pressure range

temperature range

chemical resistance

acoustic attenuation

control valve noise

Transducer design


90/183

90

Various types of designs and frequencies:

Epoxy based:

excellent acoustic and chemical properties

Temperatures -50 C t/m 100 C

pressures up to 500 bar

Full Titanium:

Temperatures - 40C t/m +180C

Pressures up to 150bar@180C

Wave guides for higher temperatures

& special applications


91/183

91

Titanium transducer for wet gas and high temperatures

Appl icat ion chart


92/183

92

ApplicationTransducer type

Dry natural gas Wet gas Sour gas Methanol Hightemperature

Highpressure

Epoxy ++ - + - ++

Full Titanium + ++ + H2O>10%

++ +

Wave guide(non custody transfer) - - +/- + ++ ++


93/183

93

Frequency selection:

Valve present: high frequency.

CO2 / low pressure: low frequency.

Absorption of the acoustic pulse (by CO2)


94/183

94

CO2 is a symmetrical molecule.

It resonates within a specific frequency band and thereby takes a lot ofenergy away from the acoustic pulse.

CO2 Theoretical absorption curves


95/183

95

The attenuation coefficient is almost constantbetween 80 kHz and 1 MHz

CT Products


96/183

96

Attenuation equation:

In this equation:

C is a constant depending on the transducer efficiency

L is the path length.

is the attenuation coefficient (almost constantbetween 80 kHz and 1 MHz)

Therefore the path length is the determining factor !

100%100

100% 2lg22 COCOL

transducer

asnaturaCO

eLCP


97/183

CO2 tests: Test set up

97


98/183

CO2 tests: Primary results

98

~1

~

~%


99/183

CO2 tests: Attenuation factor

99

4 meter, minimum pressure requirements


100/183

100

1.0 2.0 4.0 8.1 16.332.7

65.5

130.9

261.1

519.2

1029.2

0.5 0.71.0

1.42.0

2.8

4.0

5.7

8.0

11.3

15.8

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

1000.0

1200.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0

%CO2

p

ressure[bar]

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

Re f lect i ve pat h Di rec t pat h

4 inch



101/183

101

0.8 2.0 5.2 13.5 34.888.6 224.7

566.8

1424.0

3563.8

8889.4

0.4 0.6 1.11.9 3.3

5.7

9.7

16.4

27.5

46.1

77.0

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

7000.0

8000.0

9000.0

10000.0

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0%CO2

pressure[bar]

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Ref lect ive path Di rect path

6 inch



102/183

102

8 inch

5 11 23 51 110237 512

1107

2391

5163

11141

2 35

811

17

25

38

56

84

125

0.0

2000.0

4000.0

6000.0

8000.0

10000.0

12000.0

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

%CO2

pressure[bar]

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

Re f lect i ve path Di rect path



103/183

103

10 inch

7 14 27 53106 210

417

827

1639

3249

6436

3 46

913

18

26

37

53

75

107

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

7000.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

%CO2

pressu

re[bar]

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Ref lect ive path Direct path

Altosonic V12-D


104/183

104

Conclusions on CO2 .

Path length is the dominant factor whether a meter will

function or not.

The calculation model can predict the performance at the

quotation level.


105/183

The impact of fouling and the

diagnostic Expert System


106/183

106

Inlet 12 piping

Bill Frasier Ceesi, Ceesi ColoradoSprings Ultrasonic Workshop 2011


107/183

107


108/183

108


109/183

109

The straight path meter could not detect this shift !


110/183

110

Clean and dry gas applications?

Clean dry gas ?


111/183

111

IHSM pictures on fouling


112/183

112

Variations in fouling

1. Liqu id layer on the bottom of the pipe (condensates, water, spi ll-over)

2. Asymmetrical fouling (wax deposits)

3. Symmetrical wall build-up (black powder)

4. Dirt build-up on the transducer (wax)

5. Liquid contamination in the transducer ports


113/183

113

Examples of Fouling

1: Fouling as a small flow on the bottom of the pipe


114/183

114


1. Liquid layer on the bottom of the pipe (condensates, water, spill-over)

2. Asymmetr ical foul ing (wax deposi ts)





115/183

115

Examples of Fouling

Original clean situation


116/183

116

Examples of Fouling

2: Fouling, asymmetrical stuck to the pipe wall


117/183

117




3. Symmetrical wall build-up (black powder, corrosion)




118/183


119/183

119




3. Symmetrical wall build-up (black powder, corrosion)



4. Dirt bui lt-up on the transducer.


120/183

120


121/183

121







5. Liquid contamination in the transducer pockets.


122/183

122


123/183

123

Testing in Lintorf


124/183

124

Testing in Lintorf , 2 x ALTOSONIC V12, 6

Performance Monitoring: Symmetrical wall buil t-up


125/183

125

18 observation points

3. Fouling of evenly d istributed inside the pipe.


126/183

126

Expected diagnostic key indicators:

Irregular changes in the Speed of Sound as well as the Reflection coefficient (trending)

3. Fouling of evenly distributed inside the pipe; the velocity profi le

8 0%


127/183

127

The flow velocity profile is much sharper.

-14.0%

-12.0%

-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

fouling

clean

3. Fouling of evenly d istributed inside the pipe; the reflection coefficient .


128/183

128

The signal strength varies with the thickness of the layer.

Signalstrength

60.0

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

76.0

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

GAINAB3

GAINAB6

GAINAB3

GAINAB6

GAINAB1

GAINAB2

GAINAB3

GAINAB4

GAINAB5

GAINAB6

Change in signal strength on the reflecting paths

6

3

3. Fouling of evenly d istributed inside the pipe.


129/183

129

There is are irregular changes in the standard deviation; both thethickness of the layer and the surface roughness have an effect.

Standarddeviation

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

SDCh_SoS[3]

SDCh_SoS[6]

SDCh_SoS[3]

SDCh_SoS[6]

SDCh_SoS[1]

SDCh_SoS[2]

SDCh_SoS[3]

SDCh_SoS[4]

SDCh_SoS[5]

SDCh_SoS[6]

Change in the SOS standard deviation of the reflecting paths

6

3


130/183

3. Fouling of evenly d istributed inside the pipe; error curve


131/183

131

Evenly fouling

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

base downstream

evenly fouling

First order correction using GC data as input

Meter

error

Using information of a GC to calculate the SOS, a goodcorrection is possible with an uncertainty of 0.1% - 0.15%.

Performance Monitoring: Bottom fouling


132/183

132


133/183

133

Applying th in str ip of regular grade anti -seize lubricating compound

meter

Inlet pipe

1 Fouling on the bottom; the velocity profi le


134/183

134

-12.0%

-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

1. Fouling on the bottom; the velocity profi le

The changes in the flow velocity profile are so minimal, that it cannot be used as an indicator !!

Fouling

With fouling

clean

Gasflow

1. Fouling on the bottom: change in reflection coefficient


135/183

135

With thin layers, the fouling has hardly any impact on the signal strength.

60.0

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.0

Signal strength with and withoutbottom fouling

1. Fouling on the bottom: standard deviation wi th and without bottom fouling


136/183

136

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.0

Path 3

Path 6

6

3

The standard deviation of the path reflecting at the bottom increases with increasing fouling

1. Fouling on the bottom; change in the SOS of path 6


137/183

137

SOS comparison; bottom fouling

-0.30%

-0.20%

-0.10%

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

m/s

%d

ifference

SOS change in path 6

1. Fouling on the bottom; error curve


138/183

138

Bottom fouling

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

m/s

%

error

base downstream

bottem fouling

First order correction


139/183

Many more fouling tests done, such as

139


140/183

140

Key diagnostic indicators

Velo

city

pro

file

Footp

rint

refle

ctio

ncieffic

ient

sig

nals

treng

th

sta

ndard

deviatio

n

ignalto

nois

e

SOS

Bottom fouling X X X

A-symmetrical f ouling X X X

(wax deposits)

Symmetrical fouling X X X X X

(black powder)

Fouling on transducers X X

(wax deposits)Liquid contamination in the transducer pockets X

(water & condensates)

All the dif ferent ways of fouling are clearly detectable!(simplified diagram)


141/183

Krohne

the Diagnostic Expert System


142/183

142

Diagnostic Expert System

It is much more than Condition base Monitoring

IDENTICAL


143/183

Condition Based Monitoring

|31 143

C diti B d M it i


144/183

144

Condition Based Monitoring

Definition:

Maintenance when need arises

What you need is

Predictive Monitoring!


145/183

Expert System

|31 145

an expert system is a

computer system that emulates

the decision-making ability of a

human expert


146/183

146

Diagnostic Expert System

Elements in the design:

Maintenance BEFORE the need arises

Based on experimental & Analytical/numerical investigations

Based on real time data and historical data

Sophisticated software presenting Expert diagnostics

We have asked our people how to diagnose problems


147/183

147

We have asked our people how to diagnose problems

Bottomfouling

Asymmetrical fouling

Symmetrical fouling

Transducer fouling

Profile distortion

Trend analysis


148/183

We put our intel ligence

148

into the meter

KROHNE C Th hi h l l f di i


149/183

149149

PGC

T-transmitter3144

P-transmitter3051

KROHNE Care

INTERNET

TCP/IP

HART

Modbus

- The highest level of diagnostics

TCP/IP

KROHNE C t t


150/183

KROHNE Care expert system

150

Predictive maintenance

by trending

Expert system

Di ti E t t Ab l t M it i


151/183

151

Diagnostic Expert system: Absolute Monitoring

Abso lut e Monit ori ng (Tren d)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Time

PulseAcceptance[%

]

Di ti E t t R l ti t P th M it i


152/183

152

Diagnostic Expert system: Relative to Path Monitor ing

Diagnostic E pert s stem Velocit Dependent Monitor ing


153/183

153

Velocity dependant Monitoring

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Velocity [m/s]

StandardDeviationSoS

SDSoS1

SDSoS2

SDSos3

SDSoS4

SDSoS5

SDSoS6

Diagnostic Expert system: Velocity Dependent Monitor ing

Diagnostic Expert system: Application Dependent Monitoring


154/183

154

Diagnostic Expert system: Application Dependent Monitoring

Gas Composition

Temperature Calculated SoS

Pressure

Measured SoS

Diagnostic key parameters

Available key information:


155/183

155

Available key information:

Parameters

Flow velocity for six paths Speed of Sound for six paths Pulse acceptance for six paths Amplification for 12 transducers S2N for 12 transducer

Values: For each parameters Live, Average, Standard Deviation, Minimum & Maximum

Parameter checks:

AbsoluteRelative per pathVelocity dependent

Addi tional:For each parameter Historical application specific reference data.

Total

42

x

5210

x3

630

(1260)

Fl fil O ti lSOS

Relationship between diagnostic parameters is complex.


156/183

156

SD Vg

Evenly fouling

Approval

Bottom fouling

Materials

Gunk

Condensate

NoiseWall roughness

Trending

Black powder

FAT

Flow profile

Measuring points

Asymmetrical fouling

Calibration

CO2

SD SOS

Signal strengthP

T

Gas composition

Pulsation

Operating envelope

Reflectioncoefficient

Footprint

Inlet conditions

Flow conditioner

Signal to noise ratio

Thats why KROHNE Care has been designed


157/183

157

That s why KROHNE Care has been designed

To detect failures automatically

To propose measures

To check 24/7

To validate your CT

measurement

KROHNE Care WEB server built in


158/183

158158

KROHNE Care - WEB-server built-in

KROHNE Care WEB server built in


159/183

159159

PGC

T-transmitter

3144

P-transmitter3051

KROHNE Care

INTERNET Ethernet

HART

Modbus

- WEB-server built-in

Diagnostic Expert system (data)


160/183

160

Diagnostic Expert system (data)

Multiple variables

SoS, V, GAIN, S2N, PulseAccept.

Multiple monitoring types

Absolute, Relative,

Velocity & application dependant

Multiple values

Average & Standard Deviation.

Reference data

Multiple Quality Checks

Quality Status

Overall status

Diagnostic Expert system (software)


161/183

161

Multiple Quality Checks

Quality Status

Overall status


162/183

And has been working f ine over

the whole passed period

This meter works f ine, no issues expected

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Expert system


163/183

163

Warning;meter still ok, but corrective action requiredEvent

Reason for warning

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Expert system

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Diagnost ics


164/183

164

Reason for warning

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Diagnost ics

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Live data


165/183

165

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Live data


166/183

166


167/183

167


168/183

168

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: report ing (full ISO 17089 compl iance)


169/183

p g p g ( p )

169

ALTOSONIC V12 web page: Data upload & download


170/183

p g p

170


171/183

CONCLUSIONExpert System

171

Reflective Technology Detection of fouling

Complex and fast increasing amount of data requires understandable solutions

Expert system: KROHNE Carewith features:

24/7 Diagnosis by Expert System Remote control by web based functionality Flow computer functionality

To assure your billing is correct!


172/183

Verification of ultrasonic flow meters

In situ verification possibil ities


173/183

Reference values:

Factory acceptance test

High pressure flow calibration

Possibilities for in situ verification:

1. In situ verification by the meter itself: expert system.2. In situ verification by comparing the SOS calculated and measured

in compliance with AGA Report No. 8 or 10.

3. 2 meters in series

4. Master meter design

Reference values: Factory Acceptance Test (FAT)


174/183

Zero flow condition

Pressurized (appr. 150psi)

Filled with 100% Nitrogen

P&T measured

SOS calculated (AGA10)

SOS compared

Path length check

Path angle check

Functional test

Second set of reference values: Flow calibration


175/183

High pressure

Natural gas

Typically 6 flow rates

1: In situ verification by the meter itself:


176/183

The diagnost ic expert system.

Sensitivity:0.1%-0.3%on fouling

2: Speed of Sound comparison.


177/183

gas composition

actual flow

TP

Can also be done as part of

the Expert system.

Sensitivity:0.1 - 0.2% on SOS

3: Two meters in series


178/183

Ultrasonic meter and turbine meter

Commonly done in Europe for border stations.

Ultrasonic meter and ultrasonic meter

Common practise in Europe for bi-directional measurement

Sensitivity:2* OIML class +

0.2-0.3% for fouling

4: Master meter (Z-bridge)


179/183

100% duty meter

Comparison between

duty meter (possibly

contaminated) and clean

mastermeter

Comparison on a

periodic base

Master meter (Z-bridge)


180/183

100% duty meter

Comparison between

duty meter (possibly

contaminated) and clean

mastermeter

Comparison on a

periodic base

Sensitivity:2* OIML class

Master meter (Z-bridge)


181/183

2x 50% duty meter Comparison between duty

meter (possibly

contaminated) and cleanmastermeter

Comparison on a periodic

base

In reflection

In reflection


182/183

182

There are things that we know

There are things that we dont know

There are things of which we know that we dont know.

There are things that we dont know that we dont know.

The same is true with the measurement under fouling

conditions.

In reflection

If you use a straight path non reflecting design:

In reflection


183/183

y g p g g

you know that there might be fouling

you dont know if there is any fouling

you know that you dont know when there is any fouling

you dont know that you dont know what hits you

However, using a reflective design:

you know that there might be fouling

you know if there is any fouling

you know that you know when there is any fouling

1_Designing Ultrasonic Flow Meters

Documents

Transcript of 1_Designing Ultrasonic Flow Meters