An in Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies Orifice Turbine Ultrasonic and Coriolisl PDF

Index
Paper 6.2
An In Depth Comparison of Four Gas

Measurement Technologies; Orifice, Turbine,
Ultrasonic and Coriolis
Dan Hackett
Daniel Measurement & Control Asia Pacific
Tom Mooney
Daniel Europe Ltd
David Fisher
Daniel Europe Ltd
3rd International South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
9th – 11th March 2004
An In Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies;

Orifice, Turbine, Ultrasonic and Coriolis
Mr Dan Hackett, Daniel Measurement & Control Asia Pacific
Mr Tom Mooney, Daniel Europe Ltd
Mr David Fisher, Daniel Europe Ltd
1 INTRODUCTION
It is widely accepted that global gas demand is set to double in the next ten years with major
new upstream developments together with mid-stream transportation systems and
downstream feed stock projects already underway. As this gas revolution evolves there will
be a dramatic rise in the requirement for high accuracy measurement at every point in the gas
value chain, Fig 1.
Fig 1 Gas Value Chain
This value chain can be subdivided into four major categories within which, metering is
carried out,
• Gas Production
• Gas Transmission
• Gas Storage
• Gas Distribution
Within these categories there is a huge array of different gas metering applications and a
similar number of potential solutions. This can lead to confusion when selecting the optimum
solution for the application.
Two of the traditional approaches have been to use orifice plates or turbine meters. Over the
last few years however, newer technologies, in particular ultrasonic and coriolis meters, are
being utilised more frequently. Being new technologies, many practitioners are unaware of
how they compare with the traditional technologies such as orifice and turbine meters. In
particular, it can be difficult to know what flowmeter is most appropriate for a particular
project, application or specific set of circumstances. The aim of this paper is to address this
issue and hopefully provide some pointers to assist engineers with flow meter selection within
the four major categories listed above.
2 FLOWMETER OVERVIEW
2.1 Orifice Meter
2.1.1 International Standards
As a result of its longevity and wide spread usage in the industry, the orifice plate is an
extremely well documented and regulated measurement device. There are two main
1
standards for orifice metering; ISO 5167:1991 [1] and AGA 3:2000 [2]. This paper is based
around the requirements and guidance of ISO5167:1991
2.1.2 Orifice Flowmeter Overview
The orifice flowmeter consists of a thin flat plate sandwiched between flanges or installed in a
dedicated fitting. The plate has a precise, sharp edged orifice bored concentric with the pipe
axis. The flow pattern contracts as it approaches the orifice, the contraction continuing to a
distance of about an orifice diameter downstream. This point of minimum cross section is
called the vena contracta. Thereafter, the jet diverges to the full pipe section
A mathematical model, generated from experimental data, of the conditions in the meter
stream must be applied in order to calculate the flow. Refining this mathematical model is a
continual process. The uncertainty in the flowrate measurement can be predicted in
accordance with ISO 5167.
There are many ways of locating an orifice plate within a pipeline. These range from a simple
orifice flange to a more specialised fitting such as the long standing Daniel Senior Fitting,
which permits removal of the plate under pressure, Fig 2. It should be noted that other
manufacturers offer orifice fittings with the similar design objectives.
Fig 2 The Senior Fitting
There are also guidelines as to how the orifice flowmeter should be mounted in the pipeline.
As the orifice flowmeter is particularly sensitive to flow profile distortions, care should be taken
to ensure fully developed flow. ISO5167 provides details on meter tube design. Fig 3
provides a representation of the ‘catch all’ meter tube.
Fig 3 'Catch All' ISO5167 Meter Tube
This tube incorporates a 2D straightening vane within the 44D of upstream meter tube.
2.1.3 Theory of Operation
The installation of the orifice plate causes a static pressure difference between the upstream
side and the throat or downstream side of the plate, Fig 4. The rate of flow can be
2
determined from the measured value of this pressure difference and from knowledge of the
flowing gas as well as the circumstances under which the device is being used.
Fig 4 Orifice Flow Meter Pressure Profile
Applying the Bernoulli equation to the flow between the inlet and the vena contracta;
1 1
p1 + ρ 1U 1 2 + ρ 1 gz1 = p 2 + ρ 2U 2 2 + ρ 2 gz 2
2 2 (1)
Assuming the flow is incompressible and the meter is located in the horizontal position, this
simplifies to;
∆p
2
(
1 2
U 2 − U 12 =
ρ
) (2)
Conservation of mass for incompressible flow states;
A2
U1 = U 2 (3)
A1
Substitution of equation (3) in equation (2) yields the flowrate using the area at the vena
contracta;
A2 2∆P
qv = (4)
1 − (d 2 d1 )
4 ρ
This is the of course the theoretical value. In practice it is impossible to know the flow area at
the vena contracta and so the area of the orifice is used for the term A2. Similarly, the orifice
diameter is used for the term, d2. This modification plus the fact that there are frictional
pressure losses and density changes in the flow are accounted for by using the discharge
coefficient, Cd and the expansibility factor,ε. These factors can be obtained from empirical
models, which are available from the various international standards.
The introduction of the discharge coefficient and expansibility factor means that the ideal flow
rate is modified to the actual flow rate as follows.
C d εA2 2∆P
qv =
1 − (d 2 d1 )
4 ρ
(5)
The mass flow rate through the orifice plate can therefore be calculated using;
3
Cd π
qm = ε d 2 2 ∆p ρ
1− β 4 4
(6)
Within the standards, the empirical models for Cd and ε have evolved over the years.
The discharge coefficient model of Stoltz was utilised until 1998. Since 1998, a revised model
for Cd, developed by Dr Reader-Harris of NEL, has been the equation required by ISO 5167.
This together with the model for expansibility factor can be found in paragraph 8.3.2 if
ISO5167.
Determining a model for the uncertainty in mass flowrate from the orifice flowmeter is not
straightforward. There is significant interdependence of terms; for instance, the discharge
coefficient Cd = f( β, Re, taps) and the expansibility factor, ε = f(β, ∆P, p1, κ). Following the
analysis through, taking full account of this interdependence is quite complicated and the full
analysis can be found in ISO TR 5168 : 1998 Annex E [3].
Thankfully, a practical working formula for the uncertainty in mass flowrate is provided in ISO
5167. Here, it is stated that for most purposes, it is sufficient to assume that the
uncertainties of Cd, ε1, ∆P and ρ1 are independent. It is also pointed out that the deviations
caused by the interdependence between the discharge coefficient and β and ReD are of a
second order and are included in the uncertainty in the discharge coefficient equation.
Similarly, the deviations of the expansibility factor which are due to uncertainties in the
diameter ratio, the pressure and the isentropic exponent are also of a second order and are
included in the uncertainty of ε1.
The practical working formula for the uncertainty of the mass flowrate as given in ISO 5167 is
1
δq m  δC 2 2
4 2 2
  δε 1   2 β   δD   2   δd 
2 2
1  δ∆p 
2
1  δρ1 
2
 2
=  d  +   +  
4    +   
1− β 4  d  + 
 ∆p  +   
qm  C d ε
  1   1 − β   D      4   4 ρ
 1  
(7)
or in terms of percentage error
1
  2β 4 
2
 2β 4 
2
1 1 2
2
=  E Cd + Eε +     E d 2 + E ∆P 2
2 2 2
E qm 4 
E D + + Eρ  (8)
1 − β  1 − β
4
  4 4 
The relative uncertainty in the discharge coefficient is stated to be;
• 0.5% for β ≤ 0.6, OR

• (1.667β − 0.5)% for 0.6 < β≤ 0.75 (9)
The relative uncertainty in the expansibility factor can be calculated using
∆P
4 % (10)
p1
2.1.4 Advantages and Disadvantages
All meter types have advantages and disadvantages. Table 1 summarises these for orifice
flowmeters.
4
Table 1 Advantages and Disadvantages For Orifice Meters
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Well documented in standards Pulsating flow

Industry acceptance Low rangeability
Low unit capital cost High pressure loss
No moving parts Flow profile sensitive
Dry calibration acceptable Requires long meter tube/flow conditioner
No limits on temp, pressure or size Not self cleaning
Mechanically robust Can be damaged by high flow rates
2.2 Turbine Meter
There are two main standards for turbine meters, ISO 9951 [4] – Turbine meters used for the
measurement of gas flow in closed conduits, and OIML R 32 [5] -
2.2.2 Turbine Meter Overview
A basic turbine meter consists of a pressure containing meter housing with end flanges, a set
of internals incorporating the turbine wheel and gearing mechanisms and a means of counting
the turbine wheel revolutions. A typical turbine meter has additional components such as flow
conditioning devices, bearing lubrication mechanisms and sophisticated mechanical and
electrical counter systems. An exploded view of a turbine meter is given in Fig 5.
Fig 5 Turbine Meter Components
Like orifice meters, turbine meters should be mounted within a meter tube, Fig 6. Most
modern turbine meters have integral flow conditioners. These conditioners help to remove
swirl and much of the distortion from the flow profile and hence the overall straight length
requirement upstream of the meter relatively small at typically 5D.
5
Fig 6 Typical Turbine Meter Tube
The operation of a turbine meter is based upon the measurement of the velocity of gas. The
flowing gas is accelerated and conditioned by the meter’s straightening section. The
integrated straightening vanes prepare the gas flow profile by removing undesirable swirl and
asymmetry before the gas flows over the freely rotating turbine wheel. The dynamic forces of
the flowing gas cause the rotor to rotate. The turbine wheel is mounted on the main shaft,
with high precision, low friction ball bearings. The turbine wheel has helical blades that have
a known angle relative to the gas flow. The gas flow drives the turbine wheel at an angular
velocity, which, in the linear range of a well-designed meter, is proportional with the gas
velocity. Using a gearing mechanism, the rotating turbine wheel drives the mechanical
counter. In addition, the rotating blade can also be used to generate pulses via a proximity
sensor. Each pulse detected is equivalent to a discrete volume of gas at actual conditions;
i.e. the total number of pulses collected in any period of time represents the gross observed
volume during that period. For each meter, a calibration characteristic (K factor) is required.
This factor is expressed in pulses per volume.
The K factor is determined by means of a flow calibration. This flow calibration should be
carried out over the entire operating range of the meter as the K factor may vary with flow.
This variation with flow is the turbine meter’s linearity. Once the K factor has been defined,
the flow through the meter can be calculated using
Pulses
Volume = (11)
K
Similarly, the flowrate can be calculated by dividing the pulse frequency by the K factor
f
Qv = (12)
K
This is a volume flowrate at actual conditions and can be converted to mass flowrate or
standard volume flowrate by multiplying by density or performing a PTZ correction.
In an ideal case, this K factor should be constant across the meters entire flow range.
However at low flows, the mechanical friction of the bearings and counter, fluid friction and
pick-up all limit this linearity. This lower limit for linear flow decreases as the density of the
gas increases since the momentum transfer from the gas to the turbine will be higher for a
given gas velocity. This means that the mechanical friction will become less significant and
induce less non-linearity. The increase in linear range can be calculated using;
ρ atmair . patm
q min( act ) = q min (13)
ρ 0 . pact
6
qmin(act) = minimum volume flowrate at actual pressure (m3/hr)

qmin = Minimum volume flowrate at atmospheric conditions (m3/hr)
ρ0 = Process gas density at standard conditions (kg/m3)
patm = Atmospheric pressure (1.013bar)
ρatmair = Density of ambient air (1.293kg/m3)
pact = Actual pressure at flowing conditions (bar)
The uncertainty in the flow measurement may be determined by
2 2
δq v  δf   δK 
=   +   (14)
qv  f   K 
The uncertainty in pulse frequency is several orders of magnitude smaller that the uncertainty
in the K factor and therefore
δq v δK
= , that is E qv = E K (15)
qv K
That is, the uncertainty in the gross observed volume is equal to the uncertainty in the meter
factor.
The percentage uncertainty in the reference volume is calculated using;
E Q2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (16)

Z0
The advantages and disadvantages for turbine meters are given in Table 2.
Table 2 Advantages and Disadvantages For Turbine Meters
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Good accuracy over linear flow range Requires flow calibration

Industry acceptance Relatively high pressure loss
Medium capital cost Moving parts require maintenance
Medium rangeability at high pressure Cannot tolerate dirty processes
Electronic output available Possible damage due to over speeding
Digital output, high repeatability
Natural flow totaliser
2.3 Ultrasonic Meters
The situation with ultrasonic flowmeters and international standards is quite straightforward –
there isn’t one! There is however an ISO committee currently working to produce a standard,
ISO TC 30/SC 5/WG 1 [6]. In the meantime there are several best practice guidance
documents; the first to be released, in 1998 was AGA 9, Measurement of Gas by Multipath
Ultrasonic Meters [7], and then in 2000 BS7965, The Selection, Installation, Operation and
Calibration of Diagonal Path Transit Time Ultrasonic Flow Meters for Industrial Gas
7
Applications [8]. Both of these documents are under review at the moment and it is
anticipated that a new revision will be issued in the near future.
2.3.2 Ultrasonic Meter Overview
A multipath transit time ultrasonic meter (USM) is basically a device, which consists of three
main components; the meter body (cylindrical pipe spool), transducer pairs (mounted in the
pipe spool) and an electronic module, Fig. 7.
Fig 7 USM Components
Ultrasonic meters derive the volume flow of the gas by measuring the transit times of high
frequency sound waves. Transit times are measured for pulses propagating up and
downstream across the gas stream at an angle with respect to the pipe axis. These transit
times together with the meter geometry are used to calculate the average gas velocity on a
particular chord. Multiple paths are used within ultrasonic meters in order to maximise
accuracy in the overall average velocity measurement. These multiple paths also provide a
certain degree of immunity to flow profile effects such as asymmetry and swirl. The level of
immunity offered by the multipath USM varies from one design to another as shown by
Grimley [9]. Despite the fact that the USM offers some immunity to flow profile distortions,
they still require upstream straight lengths of pipe. A typical meter tube layout for a USM is
shown in Fig. 8
Fig 8 Ultrasonic Meter Tube
As stated above, ultrasonic meters measure the transit times of high frequency sound pulses.
The transducers are mounted on the meter body at defined locations. Fig 9 shows a
schematic arrangement for a single path. The dimensions X and L are precisely determined
during the meter manufacture. These measurements together with the electronic
characteristics of each transducer pair characterise the ultrasonic flowmeter. The transit time
for a signal travelling with the flow is less than that for a signal travelling against the flow. The
difference in these times determines flow velocity
8
The measurement principle is described analytically as follows;
Fig 9 USM Operating Principle
L
t ab = (17)
c + U i cosθ
L
t ba = (18)
c − U i cosθ
Equations (17) and (18) can be solved simultaneously to get expressions for the gas velocity
and the speed of sound.
L2  t ba − t ab 
Ui =   (19)
2 x  t ab t ba 
L  t ba + t ab 
c=   (20)
2  t ba .t ab 
The average velocity of the gas is determined by integrating each path velocity over the area
of the cross section. This involves using weighting factors to proportion the contribution of
each chord to the overall volume flow. The general form of this integration, (equ. 21) is the
same for all multipath designs, however the weighting factors and indeed the mechanism for
arriving at the weighting factors vary significantly from one deign to the next,
N
1
U=
N
∑w v
i =1
i i (21)
The actual volume flowrate through the USM can be calculated by multiplying by the cross
sectional area.
UD 2π
qUSM = (22)
4
As with other meter designs, a correction term is required to account for changes in meter
geometry due to changes in pressure and temperature between the factory where
dimensional measurements are made and site conditions.
q vpt = c pv 0 .ctv 0 .qusm (23)
9
where
c pv 0 = (1 + β∆P0 )
3
(24)
ctv 0 = (1 + α∆T0 )
3
(25)
If the ultrasonic meter is flow calibrated then the pressure and temperature correction terms
should be employed between conditions at the flow laboratory and site. The reason for this is
that any change in meter geometry between the factory and calibration test conditions will be
accounted for in the determined meter deviation correction factors.
When the meter is flow calibrated, and a calibration meter factor determined, the actual
volume flowrate becomes
q v = K .usm c pvc .ctvc .qusm (26)
where
c pvc = (1 + β∆Pc )
3
(27)
ctvc = (1 + α∆Tc )
3
(28)
The volume flowrate at standard reference conditions is calculated using
p.T0 .Z 0
Q= .q v (29)
p 0 .T .Z
The mass flowrate for the USM can be calculated as by multiplying volume flow by density
q m = q v .ρ (30)
Determining a model for the uncertainty in mass flowrate from the ultrasonic meter is not
straightforward. Lunde et al [10] provide a hugely comprehensive study, which considers, in
some detail, all factors and interdependencies that impact USM uncertainty. The basic model
is laid out below.
E qv2 = E cal
2
+ EUSM
2
+ E comm
2
+ E 2fcomp (31)
where
2
E cal = E k2USM + E q2ref + E rept
2
(32a)
2
EUSM = E rept
2
+ EUSM
2
,∆ (32b)
, ∆ = E body , ∆ + E time , ∆ + E I , ∆
2 2 2 2
EUSM (32c)
, ∆ = E rad , ∆ + E chord , ∆ + E angle , ∆

2 2 2 2
E body (32d)
For standard reference volume and mass flow, the percentage uncertainties are as follows
10
EQ2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (33)

Z0
E q2m = E ρ2 + E q2v (34)
It is also important to consider any additional uncertainty associated with the through life
stability of the USM. There are several influencing factors, one of which is wall roughness. It
has been shown by Zanker [11], that changes in wall roughness can cause significant drift in
USM meters that incorporate a centre path bouncing configuration to determine gas velocity.
With such chord configurations, the USM measures the velocity at the centre of the pipe, i.e.
the maximum velocity. To arrive at an average velocity, a correction factor based on
Reynolds number and wall roughness is used. Over time the wall roughness will change and
so the correction factor will be more and more erroneous. This results in serious meter drift.
This is just one influencing factor; to quantify all influences relies on a significant passing of
time together with data gathering and so responsibility has to be placed on the manufacturer
to demonstrate their meters through life stability
There are a host of benefits offered by ultrasonic technology when compared with traditional
measurement techniques such as the orifice or the turbine meter.
The main benefits for ultrasonic flowmeters are;
Table 3 Advantages and Disadvantages For Ultrasonic Meters
Advantages Disadvantages
No flow calibration required Not fully accepted by industry

High accuracy Susceptible to pressure reduction valve noise
Sophisticated Self Diagnostic Capability
Large rangeability
No additional pressure drop
No moving parts
No maintenance
Low operational cost
Low installation cost-multipath units
2.4 Coriolis Flowmeters
Recent advances in the development and performances of Coriolis meters have meant that
the measurement of the mass flowrate of gases such as natural gas for custody transfer
applications is now a reality. This has been reflected by the large take up of this technology
within the natural gas industry; as an example, Micormotion has supplied 5000 coriolis meters
for natural gas applications in the last three years. This industrial acceptance has motivated
ISO to develop a standard through Technical Committee TC30/SC12 [12]. This draft is due
for publication in 2003. In addition to this draft ISO standard, there is also an engineering
technical report prepared by AGA entitled Coriolis Flow Measurement For Natural Gas
Applications [13].
Although there is no ISO standard for natural gas measurement using coriolis measurement,
some countries however have issued type approval certificates for natural gas measurement
using coriolis meters. These include NMI, PTB, Measurement Canada and Gosstandard.
11
2.4.2 Coriolis Meter Overview
A coriolis meter is comprised of two main parts, a sensor (primary element) and a transmitter
(secondary element) Fig 10.
Fig 10 Coriolis Meter
With this design, the gas flows through a U-shaped tube. The tube is made to vibrate in a
perpendicular direction to the flow. Gas flow through the tube generates a coriolis force,
which interacts with the vibration, causing the tube to twist. The greater the angle of the twist,
the greater will be the flow. The sensing coils located on the inlet and outlet, oscillate in
proportion to the sinusoidal vibration. During the flow, the vibrating tubes and gas mass flow,
couple together due to the Coriolis force, causing a phase shift between the vibrating sensing
coils. The phase shift, which is measured by the coriolis meter transmitter, is directly
proportional to the mass flow rate. The vibration frequency is proportional to the flowing
density of the flow. However, the density measurement from the coriolis meter is not normally
used as part of the gas measurement station. Like other meters the Coriolis is usually
mounted in a meter tube. Since the device is insensitive to flow disturbances, there is no
requirement for any form of flow conditioning or straight lengths, Fig 11.
Fig 11 Coriolis Meter Tube Layout
Coriolis meters operate on the principle that if a particle inside a rotating body moves in a
direction toward or away from the centre of rotation, the particle generates inertial forces that
act on the body. Coriolis meters create a rotating motion by vibrating a tube or tubes carrying
the flow, and the inertial force (Coriolis force) that results is proportional to the mass flow rate.
By measuring the amount of inertial force or deflection, it is possible to infer the mass flow
rate. It is this the phenomenon that is harnessed with the coriolis flow meter.
12
An analytical description follows;
at
ar
δm ω
∆x
P v
r ∆Fc T
Fig. 12 Analytical Description of Coriolis Meter Principle
A particle of mass δm slides with constant velocity v in a tube T that is rotating with angular
velocity ω about a fixed point P. The particle undergoes an acceleration, which can be
divided into two components, a radial component and a transverse component.
a r = r.ω 2 (35)
at = 2.ω .v (36)
To impart the Coriolis acceleration, at, to the particle, a force of magnitude 2ω·v·δm is
required in the direction of at. The oscillating tube exerts this force on the particle. The
particle reacts to this force with an equal force called the Coriolis force, ∆FC, which is defined
as follows:
∆FC = 2.ϖ .v.δm (37)
When a fluid of density ρ flows at constant velocity v along an oscillating tube rotating as
shown in Fig 12, any length ∆x of the oscillating tube experiences a transverse Coriolis force
of magnitude
∆FC = 2.ω .v.ρ . A.∆x (38)
where A is the cross-sectional area of the oscillating tube interior. Since the mass flow rate
qm can be expressed as:
q m = v. A.ρ (39)
The transverse Coriolis force can therefore be expressed as
∆FC = 2ω .q m .∆x (40)
Hence, the (direct or indirect) measurement of the Coriolis force exerted by the flowing fluid
on a rotating tube can provide a measurement of the mass flow rate. This is the principle of
operation of a Coriolis meter.
The basic model for a Coriolis meter uncertainty is laid out below.
2
Eqm = Ecal
2
+ ECoriolis
2
+ Ecomm
2
+ E 2fcomp (41)
where
2
Ecal = Ek2Coriolis + Eqm
2
ref
+ Erept
2
(41a)
13
2
ECoriolis = Erept
2
+ ECoriolis
2
,∆ (41b)
,∆ = E + E2 + Et2− t 0 , ∆
2 2
ECoriolils (41c)
FT ,∆ F P,∆
For standard reference volume and mass flow, the percentage uncertainties are as follows
EQ2 = E q2m + E ρ std (42)
It is also important to consider any additional uncertainty associated with the through life
stability of the Coriolis Meter. There are two main influencing factors, one of which is change
in flow tube structural characteristics caused by erosion of tube wall by abrasive particles. The
second is the coating of the flow tube by debris. Abrasion of the flow tubes by abrasive
particles can directly effect the flow calibration of the meter. Coating of the flow tubes by
debris is only a concern at low fluid flow velocities were the meter will not be self cleaning,
this influence will not affect the meters calibration and only affects the meters zero and can be
corrected by regular zero checks for drift and re-zeroing if required. Both of these influences
can be identified as occurring under flowing conditions by monitoring the drift in flowing
density over time.
Table 4 Advantages and Disadvantages for Coriolis Meters
Advantages Disadvantages
Mass flow Potential erosion due to abrasive particles
Liquid calibration for gas use High pressure loss may effect turn down ratio
Insensitive to flow distortions/profile Sensitive to vibration close to operating freq.
Linear – good range Sensitive to pulsations close to operating freq.
Accurate for BTU Only available in small sizes
Flowing density – meter health diagnostic
No wearing parts
Elimination of Tf, Pf, and Zf uncertainties
Bi-directional
3 APPLICATION OF TECHNOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this section of the paper is to compare each of the four technologies in typical
applications from the gas value chain.
• Production Separator Gas Outlet

• Gas Supply To Transmission Network
• Gas Storage Facility Incorporating Cavern Metering
• City Gate Distribution
Sample process data is given for each application, in order that a system can be designed
using the four technologies. In each case the uncertainty of the gas measurement system
should be better than +/-1.0% on standard volume at 95% confidence limits. The exception to
this is the case of the cavern metering within the gas storage application where the system
uncertainty should be better than +/- 2.0%.
Solutions presented for each of the four measurement technologies are compared in terms of
performance, installation and scope, capital cost and through life cost
14
In all cases the gas composition will be as defined in Table 5.
Table 5 Gas Composition Used For Comparison Study
Methane 85.9063 mol %

Nitrogen 1.0068 mol %
CO2 1.4954 mol %
Ethane 8.4919 mol %
Propane 2.3015 mol %
i - butane 0.3486 mol %
n - butane 0.3506 mol %
i - pentane 0.0509 mol %
n - pentane 0.048 mol %
The following is a list of major ancillary equipment and instrumentation which may be required
as part of the overall metering solution. This is reflected in the capital expenditure (CAPEX)
required for each solution
• System inlet and outlet header on multi stream configurations.

• Inlet and outlet double block and bleed valves.
• In-line basket filter for turbine solutions only.
• Upstream and downstream meter tube.
• Primary Measurement Device.
• Inlet/outlet header pressure gauge small bore assemblies.
• Differential pressure transmitter and pressure gauge small bore assemblies. Transmitters
are Rosemount 3051 CD model.
• Static pressure transmitter and pressure gauge small bore assemblies. Transmitters are
Rosemount 3051 CG model.
• Temperature transmitter and test assemblies. Transmitters are Rosemount 3144
• Stream valved venting assembly
The specific content of each solution is given in the relevant sections to follow.
For the operational expenditure (OPEX) costs have been calculated taking the following into
consideration.
Remove Primary Measurement Device for Inspection. – This cost estimate includes for the
isolation and de-pressurising of the meter stream the purging of the line then to
remove/inspect/replace primary measurement device. A boroscope inspection of tube is
accounted for and finally the re-pressurising of the meter streams incorporating leak test.
With the condition based monitoring techniques available through the newer technologies,
this activity is less frequent than with the traditional meters.
Remove Primary Measurement Device for Calibration. – This cost estimate includes for the
isolation and de-pressurising of the meter stream the purging of the line then the removal of
the primary measurement device. The meter is then transported to calibration facility and
calibrated returned and re-installed. The meter stream is then re-pressurised and leak tested
finally the flowcomputer is re-configured. This activity is mostly applicable to the turbine and
ultrasonic flowmeters. With the ultrasonic flowmeter, the frequency of recalibration diminishes
as successful repeat calibration history is developed and as confidence in condition based
monitoring techniques become more proven.
Secondary Instrument Calibrations. – This cost estimate includes for the calibration of the DP
transmitters (orifice only), pressure and temperature. In addition, the flow computer
configuration is checked. This activity is carried out at equal intervals on each technology.
Re-Certification. - The above cost estimate includes for certification costs and documenting all
the above procedures.
15
The frequency of the above activities will vary depending on the metering technology and
application. Specific details are given in the relevant sections to follow.
3.2 Production Separator Application
In recent years, more and more assets are being shared within The North Sea. Increasing
numbers of tie back systems and commingling of production pipelines has led to a rapid
growth in hydrocarbon allocation systems. The accuracy demands of these allocation
systems are now often comparable with those of a fiscal metering station. One of the
common gas metering points within such a system is the outlet of the production separator.
Here it is not uncommon for projects to request uncertainty budgets of better than +/-1.0%
over fairly wide turndown ratios. This uncertainty budget is accompanied by a process
description, which states clean dry gas for the application. This means on the face of things,
the application can be satisfied. What transpires once the system comes into operation is
often not what was envisaged and the implications for the measurement accuracy and
functionality can be significant. This is discussed further in the subsequent sections of the
paper.
3.2.1 Process Data & Metering Requirement
Table 6 presents the flow, pressure and temperature data together with corresponding
physical properties for the gas.
Table 6 Process Conditions – Production Separator Application
Flow Capacity Maximum Flow : 1000000 Nm3 / day

Normal Flow : 500000 Nm3 / day
Minimum Flow : 75000 Nm3 / day
Operating & Design Operating Pressure 25 barg

Conditions Operating Temperature 60 °C
Design Pressure 38 barg
Design Temperature 0 to 100
Physical Properties Viscosity 0.0123842 centipoise

Isentropic Exponent 1.267876 (-)
Mol. Wt 18.768 kg/kmol
Base Density 0.7959 kg/m3
Flow Density 18.360141 kg/m3
Base Compressibility 0.9972 (-)
Flow Compressibility 0.959989 (-)
The primary element shall be provided with upstream and downstream meter tubes. These
tubes should be in accordance with the relevant standards and codes of practice. The
system should be designed as a single 100% capacity meter run. A double block and bleed
valving arrangement or equivalent shall be provided upstream and downstream of each meter
run to facilitate possible removal. Each solution will have identical flow computer and gas
analysis hardware.
3.2.2 Orifice Meter Solution
The orifice meter solution is in accordance with ISO 5167, Fig 13. The meter size and rating
is 8” ANSI 300. However to achieve the full turn down ratio, two beta ratios, i.e. two plates,
are required (beta = 0.575 and 0.295). In addition, the low limit for pressure drop across the
plate was set at 30mbar and the upper limit set at 620mbar). To achieve this wide DP range
whilst maintaining measurement accuracy, two DP transmitters are required. The calibrated
ranges for these devices are set at 30 to 200mbar and 160 to 620mbar. The flowcomputer
incorporates software which controls which DP cell output is used in the flowrate calculations.
16
When the flow range dictates, the orifice plate must be changed. This can be done at line
conditions using a fitting such as that shown in Fig 2, however it is unusual for this to be
permitted offshore. Normally the meter run is isolated and depressurised to facilitate plate
change.
The meter has 44D of upstream pipe incorporating a tube bundle of length 2D located 24D
upstream of the orifice meter. The orifice plate is mounted in a fitting. Isolation valves
located upstream and downstream of the meter allow for isolation and depressurisation of the
meter run for inspection and orifice plate change.
Fig. 13 Production Separator – 8” ANSI 300 Orifice Solution
The metering system incorporates two differential pressure transmitters, a pressure

transmitter and temperature transmitter.
3.2.3 Turbine Meter Solution
The turbine meter solution complies with the standards listed in section 2.2.1, and is shown in
Fig 14. The turbine meter has been sized as a 6” ANSI 300. The meter comes with an
integral flow conditioner which means that only 5D of upstream straight lengths are required.
Double block and bleed valves located upstream and downstream of the meter allow for
isolation and depressurisation of the meter run for inspection and recalibration. A filter has
been included to protect the turbine meter from any debris in the process. Pressure and
temperature instrumentation is also included.
In addition to the equipment listed above, a spare turbine meter has been included so as to
minimise downtime during periodic recalibrations.
17
Fig 14 Production Separator – 6” ANSI 300 Turbine Meter Solution
3.2.4 Ultrasonic Meter Solution
The ultrasonic meter solution is in accordance with the guidelines given in BS7965 (2000) and
AGA9, Fig 15. The meter required is sized as a 6” ANSI 300 class unit. The multipath USM
upstream meter tube is 20D, however this could be reduced to 10D if the piping installation
upstream of the metering assembly does not cause excessive flow profile distortion or if a
flow conditioner is used. There are double block and bleed isolation valves and a spare
meter to minimise downtime during periodic recalibrations. Pressure and temperature
instrumentation is included also.
Fig. 15 Production Separator – 6” ANSI 300 Class USM Solution
18
3.2.5 Coriolis Meter Solution
As yet there is no standard for coriolis measurement of natural gas. The coriolis metering
solution presented in this example is based upon manufacturer guidelines and accepted
industrial practices. The meter was sized as a 6” ANSI 300 class unit, Fig 16.
Fig 16 Production Separator – 6” ANSI 300 Coriolis Meter Solution
The U Tube style coriolis meter is virtually independent of flow profile and so the purpose of
the meter tube is simply to allow instrument connections. The tube has double block and
bleed isolation valves to facilitate removal for inspection or repair.
3.2.6 Installation and CAPEX Comparison
Table 7 presents CAPEX information together with installation requirements. The price ratio
shown indicates what each solution costs relative to the most expensive solution. The
CAPEX data is for the metering system only and does not account for the cost of transporting
this to site or for the cost of ‘real estate’ it will occupy. It does account for flow computing and
analyser equipment, which although is common to all solutions, does impact on the price ratio
and so has to be included. It should also be noted that there is a spare USM and spare
turbine to minimise downtime during meter recalibrations.
Table 7 – CAPEX and Installation Requirements (Production Separator)
ORIFICE USM TURBINE CORIOLIS

METER RUN SIZE 8" 6" 6" 6"
A.N.S.I. 300# 300# 300# 300#
NO. OF RUNS 1 1 1 1
PRICE RATIO (one as the most expensive system)

Mechanical Skid 91% 85% 100% 76%
SKID DIMENSIONS
Length mm 10,750 5,500 5,500 4,500
Breadth mm 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Height mm 1,500 1,500 2,200 2,000
Dry Weight kg 3,750 2,200 2,200 2,000
19
The installation data shown in Table 7 is also very significant when comparing CAPEX. It is
clear that the physical requirements of the orifice solution will make it less attractive for an
offshore application in terms of weight, space and transportation costs. The coriolis solution
however, offers not only the lowest CAPEX in terms of purchase price but also the best
solution terms of physical requirements.
3.2.7 Operational Expense Comparison
Fig 17 presents OPEX information on the four technologies, both for the start up year and
also for a seven-year period. It is very difficult to predict OPEX requirements due to the
various differing operational practices followed.
OPERATING COSTS OVER SEVEN YEARS
£80,000
£60,000
£40,000
£20,000
£0
Orifice Turbine USM Coriolis
1st Year 7 Year
Fig 17. Production Separator - OPEX
For the orifice solution, the OPEX is calculated based upon having four plate inspections
during the start up year and the two per annum for the remainder of the timeframe.
Instruments are calibrated on a monthly basis and fixed costs relate to certifying plates, which
is done on an annual basis.
For the turbine solution, the meter will be visually inspected twice in year one and then once
per year thereafter. In addition the meter is sent for flow calibration on an annual basis. The
secondary instruments are calibrated monthly.
The USM costs are based upon conducting three flow calibrations over the seven-year
period. The secondary instrumentation is calibrated monthly. As the USM has an extensive
suite of diagnostics, a condition based monitoring routine has been included. This calls for an
engineer to analyse diagnostic data on a monthly basis.
The coriolis meter OPEX includes a single flow calibration. The meter is required to have the
zero reading checked three times per year and a monthly health check on diagnostics.
Secondary instruments are calibrated on a monthly basis.
These operation costs are based upon no external problems or meter / instrument failures.
Costs could easily rise due to various circumstances, as an example, the number of orifice
plate changes required to satisfy the turndown requirements will depend upon the production
profile of the facility. This will have a dramatic impact on the orifice plate OPEX. In addition
any plant upset will require plate inspection and possible repair if damaged which again will
have significant impact on costs. For the turbine meter, any plant upset that causes damage
to the turbine meter will clearly have an impact. Similarly with the USM, if there are
transducer problems for example, this may cause extra cost to be incurred. There is of
course redundancy built into multipath USMs, which will minimise operational exposure.
Another highly significant risk for cost is of course measurement uncertainty and this is
discussed later in the paper.
20
3.2.8 Discussion
For the specific example given in this section it has been shown that all meters satisfy the
process. From an economic standpoint, both the orifice and turbine solutions are costly in
terms of CAPEX and OPEX. The OPEX for the orifice solution will vary depending on how
often the plate has to be changed as a result of the gas production profile. The physical
dimensions and weight of the orifice solution also make it unattractive for offshore
applications. The USM and coriolis offer the best option in terms of CAPEX, OPEX and
installation requirements. This is the main reason for the rapid growth in the use of USMs in
particular offshore in recent years. It is anticipated that coriolis meters will see a similar
growth in the coming years for the smaller line size applications.
From a practical perspective however, one key aspect to production separator metering is
that the gas will, inevitably, have foreign matter present at some time. This generally takes
the form of free liquid carry over, making the gas wet. The presence of this wet gas raises
two key questions for the measurement system.
• What will the impact be on functionality, i.e. will the system still operate?
• What will the impact be of measurement performance?
When selecting a meter type for this application, the prospect of wet gas should be at the
forefront of our minds, regardless of the process engineer’s prediction of clean dry gas from
the separator!
Orifice meter solutions are extremely robust and will continue to give a reading under even
extreme conditions. The metering performance however will be greatly affected by the
presence of liquids. The main reason for this relates to the fact that the pressure drop
through the system is related to the momentum of the gas stream (density multiplied by
velocity squared). The density of a two-phase mixture, especially at relatively low pressures,
will be very different from the single-phase gas density. As an example, at 28 bar, and 0.5%
liquid volume fraction (LVF), there can be an approximate 20% difference in the density of the
mixture to that of the gas. Since it is the gas density that is used in the flow calculations, a
serious error will be introduced.
When looking at turbine meters as a solution for this type of application it is obvious that the
practical considerations make it unfeasible. Any carry over from the separator, even with a
filter in place will quickly damage the blades of the turbine and stop measurement. For this
reason turbine meters are not utilised in such applications.
Ultrasonic meters have varying degrees of functionality depending upon the nature of the wet
gas flow and also the LVF. Provided the transducers are not swamped in liquid the unit will
continue to function. In the case of liquid volumes being so high that the meter does stop
functioning, there is an opportunity for recovery after the liquid has passed and drained from
the transducer ports. With respect to accuracy, since USMs are velocity meters, the impact of
liquid will have a different impact on accuracy depending upon the flow regime of the mixture.
As a rough rule of thumb, Zanker [14] states that for homogeneous mist flow where the gas
velocity is approximately equal to the liquid velocity, the additional error caused by liquid is
equal to the volume occupied by the liquid, i.e. the LVF. For stratified flow, where the gas
velocity is approximately five times the liquid velocity the additional error will be approximately
five times the LVF. In all cases, liquids cause USMs to read high.
Of the four meter technologies, the coriolis meter appears to offer the best immunity to wet
gas. There may be issues associated with slugging and plugs causing temporary functionality
issues and mis-measurements. When subjected to liquid contaminants e.g. glycol, the meter
error is approximately proportional to the mass ratio of liquid to gas flow. This means that for
a mass ratio of 1.0%, the additional uncertainty will be 1.0%.
21
3.3 Transmission System
This is the point in the value chain where large amounts of gas are shipped from the gas
gatherer or processor to a gas distributor. The metering points can be anywhere along the
transmission pipeline, however the example we shall examine is the point of exit from the
processing plant to the National Transmission System (NTS). In these applications, the gas
is usually well processed, clean, and dry permitting the highest accuracy measurement.
Traditionally, natural gas transmission companies in North America, Asia, Latin America and
The UK have used orifice meters, while in Continental Europe, turbine meters have typically
been used. IN recent years USMs are being used more and more for these applications.
Table 8 presents the flow, pressure and temperature data together with corresponding
physical properties for the gas. This gas has to be measured within +/-1.0% on standard
volume at a confidence level of 95%.
Table 8 Process Conditions – Transmission Application


Design Temperature 0 to 50°C

The solution should be skid mounted with inlet and outlet headers. The primary element shall
be provided with upstream and downstream meter tubes. These tubes should be in
accordance with the relevant standards and codes of practice. The system should be
designed in an N+ 1 configuration such that there is a redundant meter run. A double block
and bleed valving arrangement or equivalent shall be provided upstream and downstream of
each meter run to facilitate depressurisation of the meter run for removal or inspection of the
meters and meter tubes.
3.3.2 Orifice Meter Solution
The orifice meter solution comprises four, fully instrumented, parallel 24” ANSI 600 orifice
meter runs These meters, designed in accordance with ISO 5167 are skid mounted
complete with inlet and outlet headers. Each meter run has a double block and bleed
isolation valve, Fig 18.
The metering system comprises four sets of secondary instrumentation.
22
Fig 18 Transmission Application – 24” Orifice Meter Solution
3.3.3 Turbine Meter Solution
The turbine meter solution comprises four 20” ANSI 600 turbine meter runs and complies
with the standards listed in section 2.2.1, Fig 19. The turbine meter comes with an integral
flow conditioner which means that only 5D of upstream straight lengths are required. Double
block and bleed valves located upstream and downstream of the meter allow for isolation and
depressurisation of the meter run for inspection and recalibration. A filter has been included
to protect the turbine meter from any debris in the process. Pressure and temperature
instrumentation is also included.
In addition to the equipment listed above, a single spare turbine meter has been included so
as to maintain redundancy during periodic recalibrations
Fig 19. Transmission Application – 20” ANSI 600 Turbine Solution
23
3.3.4 Ultrasonic Meter Solution
The USM solution comprises four 20” ANSI 600 USM meter runs, Fig 20. The USM meter
tube is 20D in length however this could be reduced to 10D if a conditioning plate is used.
Double block and bleed valves located upstream and downstream of the meter allow for
isolation and depressurisation of the meter run for inspection and recalibration. Pressure and
temperature instrumentation is also included.
In addition to the equipment listed above, a single spare USM has been included so as to
maintain redundancy during periodic recalibrations
Fig 20 Transmission Application – 20” ANSI 600 USM Solution
3.3.5 Coriolis Meter Solution
The coriolis meter has a maximum size of six inch. For this application this means 22 parallel
meter runs, with all of the associated valving and instrumentation. The authors have not
prepared a drawing for this solution, however the economic implications are given in the
following sections.
Table 9 presents CAPEX information together with installation requirements. As with the
previous example, the price ratio shown indicates what each solution costs relative to the
most expensive solution. The CAPEX data is for the metering system only and does not
account for the cost of transporting this to site or for the cost of ‘real estate’ it will occupy. It
does account for flow computing and analyser equipment, which is especially relevant for the
large number of streams required for the coriolis solution.
24
Table 9 CAPEX and Installation Requirements (Transmission System)
METER RUN SIZE 24" 16 20" 6"

A.N.S.I. 600# 600# 600# 600#
NO. OF RUNS 4 4 4 22

SKID DIMENSIONS
Length mm 30,000 12,500 12,000 9,500
Breadth mm 6,000 5,250 5,750 25,000
Height mm 3,750 2,250 3,500 2,000
Dry Weight kg 65,000 36,000 38,000 48,000
In an onshore application such as this, consideration of weight and space are not as critical
as an offshore production application. All solutions meet the requirement, however the limited
size of the coriolis meter means that 22 meter runs are required to achieve the throughout
requirement. There is little difference between the CAPEX for the orifice and turbine solution,
however the USM offers considerable saving.
The OPEX costs are shown in Fig 21. The costs have been derived in a similar way to the
production separator example of the previous section. However there are some differences.
With the orifice meter, there are three plate inspections scheduled for year one and then 2 in
each subsequent year. For the turbine meter there is a single visual meter inspection during
year one and then this inspection coincides with the annual meter calibration. The
operational activities for the USM and coriolis are the same as in the production case.
£500,000
£400,000
£300,000
£200,000
£100,000
£0
1 Orifice Plate 2 Turbine 3 USM 4 Coriolis
1st Year 7 Year
Fig 21 Transmission Application OPEX
3.3.8 Discussion
It has been shown that all meters can meet the requirement of this application, however it is
fairly clear that the coriolis option is not a viable option. Of the remaining three technologies,
the USM offers the best solution due to lower CAPEX and OPEX and due the small physical
requirements.
Unlike the production application, transmission metering poses fewer practical hurdles and so
the technology is less susceptible to upset.
25
3.4 Gas Storage System
Natural gas is stored under the ground in either porous rocks or cavities mined in salt beds
(aquifers or salt layers). These underground "storage facilities" are filled in summer to
prepare for the intense winter usage. The existence of such storage facilities enables a
balance to be struck between gas production and consumption. From a measurement point
of view, these systems generally involve a combination of high and moderate accuracy
metering. High accuracy is required for the storage facility import/export pay metering while
individual caverns require less accurate process management measurement.
Table 10 presents the flow and process data for the gas storage system. This includes both
the overall station duty and that of the individual caverns.
Table 10 Process Conditions – Gas Storage Application
Storage Caverns Station Import / Export
Flow Capacity Maximum Flow : 480,000 4,800,000 Nm3 / day

Normal Flow : 150,000 1,500,000 Nm3 / day
Minimum Flow : 48,000 480,000 Nm3 / day
Metering Conditions Pressure Temperature Pressure Temperature

Minimum 50 barg 5°C 50 barg 15°C
Maximum 150 barg 15°C 150 barg 5°
Physical Properties Pressure 50 150 barg

Temperature 15 5° °C
Isentropic Exponent 1.314501 2.31328 (-)
Viscosity 0.0119522 0.020957 centipoise
Mol. Wt 18.768 18.768 kg/kmol
Base Density 0.7959 0.7959 kg/m3
Flow Density 46.2266 183.74188 kg/m3
Base Compressibility 0.9973 0.9973 (-)
Flow Compressibility 0.86449 0.666984 (-)
For the station import / export metering, the overall system uncertainty should be better than
±1.0% at 95% confidence interval. The solution should be an N+1 configuration and should
also be skid mounted with inlet and outlet headers. With the storage caverns measurement
uncertainty should be better than ±2.0% at 95% confidence interval. A single 100% meter run
is all that is required for the cavern metering. In all cases the metering solution must be bi-
directional.
3.4.2 Orifice Meter Solutions
The following sections present solutions for both applications utilising orifice technology.
3.4.2.1 Cavern Metering
The orifice solution comprises a single 6” ANSI 1500 orifice meter. The metering system has
been designed as bi-directional, which means the orifice plate has to be sufficiently thin to
permit a single sharp edge with no bevel. This limits the maximum pressure drop across the
plate in order that plate deflection is not significant. The limited maximum pressure drop and
the turndown ratio on this application are such that two plates are required. The meter tube
has to be 44D both upstream and downstream with tube bundles incorporated at both sides,
Fig 22.
26
Fig 22 Storage Cavern Application – 6” ANSI 1500 Orifice Solution
3.4.2.2 Station Import / Export
The station import / export requirement is satisfied with two 100% 12” ANSI 1500 orifice meter
tubes. Like the cavern solution, the orifice meters are bi-directional. This solution
incorporates inlet and outlet headers and all instrumentation.
Fig 23 Storage Import / Export Application – 12” ANSI 1500 Solution
3.4.3 Turbine Metering Solution
Fig 24 shows a 4” ANSI 1500 turbine solution for the storage cavern application. In order to
satisfy the bi-directional requirement, an elaborate valve / piping arrangement is required.
27
Fig 24 Storage Cavern Application – 4” ANSI 1500 Turbine Solution
3.4.3.2 Station Import / Export Metering
The station import / export requirement is satisfied with two 10” ANSI 1500 turbine meter
tubes each capable of handling 100% of the station capacity. Like the cavern solution, an
elaborate valving arrangement is required to achieve the bi-directional flow requirement. This
solution incorporates inlet and outlet headers and all instrumentation, Fig 25.
Fig 25 Storage Import / Export Application – 10” ANSI 1500 Turbine Solution
3.4.4 Ultrasonic Metering Solution
The cavern metering is satisfied by a 4” ANSI 1500 USM. As USMs are naturally bi-
directional, there is no need for complicated piping arrangements. There is a requirement for
the upstream straight lengths to be present both sides of the meter as shown in Fig 26.
28
Fig 26 Storage Cavern Application – 4” ANSI 1500 USM Solution
3.4.4.2 Station Import / Export
The import / export metering is satisfied by two 10” ANSI 1500 USM, Fig 27. Each meter run
is capable of handling 100% of the station capacity.
Fig 27. Storage Import / Export Application – 10” ANSI 1500 USM Solution
3.4.5 Coriolis Metering Solution
For high-pressure applications of this sort (ANSI 1500), gas coriolis meters are not available.
29
Table 11 shows CAPEX for the Storage cavern applications.
Table 11 CAPEX and Installation Requirements (Storage Cavern Application)
ORIFICE USM TURBINE
METER RUN SIZE 6" 4" 4"

A.N.S.I. 1500# 1500# 1500#
NO. OF RUNS 1 1 1
NO. OF CAVERNS 10 10 10

Mechanical Skid 56% 47% 100%
SKID DIMENSIONS PER RUN

Length mm 16,500 7,500 10,500
Breadth mm 1,200 1,200 3,000
Height mm 2,000 2,000 2,200
Dry Weight mm 5500 4000 12000
3.4.6.2 Station Import/Export Metering
Table 12 CAPEX and Installation Requirements (Storage Import Export Application)
ORIFICE USM TURBINE
METER RUN SIZE 12" 10" 10"

A.N.S.I. 1500# 1500# 1500#
NO. OF RUNS 2 2 2

Mechanical Skid 75% 62% 100%
SKID DIMENSIONS
Length mm 25,000 15,750 16,500
Breadth mm 2,500 2,500 4,500
Height mm 2,500 2,000 2,200
Dry Weight kg 30,000 20,000 35,000
3.4.7 System Operation Expense Comparison
Operational activity differs for the storage cavern metering and the storage import / export
metering due to the differing accuracy requirements.
In the case of the station import / export meters, the operational activity is the same as that of
a transmission application described in section 3.3.7. For the cavern meters, these activities
are less arduous. For the orifice meters, the plate is removed for inspection once per year
and the secondary instruments are calibrated three times per year. With the turbine, there is
a visual inspection in year one only. However annual flow calibrations are required.
Instruments are calibrated three times per year. With the USM there is a single flow
calibration carried out at commissioning stage. Secondary instrumentation is calibrated three
times per year.
30
£250,000
£200,000
£150,000
£100,000
£50,000
£0
1 Orifice Plate 2 Turbine 3 USM
1st Year 7 Year
Fig 28. Storage Cavern Application OPEX
£80,000
£60,000
£40,000
£20,000
£0
1 Orifice Plate 2 Turbine 3 USM
1st Year 7 Year
Fig 29. Storage Import/Export Application OPEX
3.4.8 Discussion
When considering the described process information in isolation, it is apparent that the orifice
meter, turbine and USM can satisfy the requirements of both the cavern storage and the
import / export applications.
From an economic standpoint, the turbine has the highest CAPEX in both applications. This
is due to the requirement for additional piping and valves to satisfy the bi-directional
requirement. The orifice meter solution has the largest footprint since 44D of straight pipe is
required on both sides of the meter. The USM has the lowest CAPEX and footprint. On the
OPEX costs, the USM has the lowest cost, with turbine meters proving the most costly.
From a practical perspective, it is common for there to be wet gas present when exporting gas
from the storage caverns. The considerations discussed within the section on production
metering are therefore applicable here.
When considering the economic and practical considerations, it becomes clear that the USM
is the most appropriate technology for gas storage applications.
3.5 City Gate Gas Distribution Application
Natural gas is used in 3 main sectors of economic activity: industrial, commercial (including
local authorities) and residential, which leads the field. As gas is distributed to these markets
it is measured. One of the key measurement points is at the city gate. In the same way as
with the previous applications, city gas metering is investigated.
31
Table 13 presents flow and process data for the city gate distribution application. The
measurement has to be made to within ±1.0% at 95% confidence intervals.
Table 13 Process Conditions – City Gate Distribution


Design Temperature 0 to 50 °C

The primary element shall be provided with upstream and downstream meter tubes. These
tubes should be in accordance with the relevant standards and codes of practice. The
system should be designed as a single 100% capacity meter run. A double block and bleed
valving arrangement or equivalent shall be provided upstream and downstream of each meter
run to facilitate possible removal. Each solution will have identical flow computer and gas
analysis hardware.
3.5.2 Orifice Metering Solution
The orifice solution comprises a single 100% 6” ANSI 150 meter and meter tube. To achieve
the full turn down ratio, two beta ratios are required. The system is schematically identical to
that shown in Fig 13 incorporating isolation valves and secondary instrumentation.
3.5.3 Turbine Metering Solution
The turbine solution comprises a single 100% 6” ANSI 150 meter and meter tube. The
system is schematically identical to that shown in Fig 14 incorporating isolation valves, a filter
and secondary instrumentation. A spare turbine meter is included in the scope to minimise
downtime during recalibration.
3.5.4 Ultrasonic Metering Solution
The USM solution comprises a single 100% 6” ANSI 150 meter and meter tube. The system
is schematically identical to that shown in Fig 15 incorporating isolation valves and secondary
instrumentation. A spare USM is included in the scope to minimise downtime during
recalibration
3.5.5 Coriolis Metering Solution
The coriolis solution comprises a single 100% 4” ANSI 150 meter and meter tube. The
system is schematically identical to that shown in Fig 16 incorporating isolation valves and
secondary instrumentation.
32
Table 14 shows the CAPEX requirements for each solution.
Table 14 CAPEX and Installation Requirements (Distribution Application)
METER RUN SIZE 6" 6" 6" 4"

A.N.S.I. 150# 150# 150# 150#
NO. OF RUNS 1 1 1 1

SKID DIMENSIONS
Length mm 9,500 5,000 5,000 4,000
Breadth mm 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Height mm 2,000 1,500 2,200 2,000
Dry Weight kg 2,500 2,000 2,000 1,800
Operational activities are identical to those of the transmission application. OPEX costs are
shown in Fig 30.
£80,000
£60,000
£40,000
£20,000
£0
1 Orifice Plate 2 Turbine 3 USM 4 Coriolis
1st Year 7 Year
Fig 30. City Gate Distribution Application - OPEX
Since the orifice solution requires two beta ratios to satisfy the turndown ratio, the OPEX
costs may rise significantly depending upon the actual flowrates experienced.
3.5.8 Discussion
It is apparent that all meters can satisfy the requirements of this application. From an
economic standpoint, there is little to separate orifice, turbine and USM in terms of CAPEX.
However the orifice solution does require a larger footprint. The coriolis offers a lower cost
solution while occupying less space. With regard to OPEX, the turbine meter proves to be the
most costly, whilst the coriolis is least expensive.
From the practical standpoint, there is often a significant pressure reduction in the vicinity of
the meter that can cause a problem for the USM. Although USMs are becoming more
33
immune to this issue, the possibility of meter failure should be considered at an early stage if
large pressure cuts are expected in the vicinity of the meter.
Although turbine meters have traditionally been used for these applications, it is anticipated
that the benefits offered by coriolis and USM will mean greater use in the near future.
4. COMPARE SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES
Uncertainty models were presented for each technology in the overview sections. Using
these models, typical uncertainties are calculated for each meter type.
4.1 Orifice Meter
Recall the uncertainty model for orifice meters presented in section 2.1.3.
1
  2β 4 
2
 2β 4 
2
1 1 2
2
=  E Cd + Eε +     E d 2 + E ∆P 2
2 2 2
E qm 4 
E D + + Eρ  (9)
1 − β  1 − β
4
  4 4 
Inserting typical values for each of the terms, we can calculate uncertainty.
Ecd = 0.50%
Eε = 0.0071%
ED = 0.40%
Ed = 0.07%
EDP = 1.21%
Eρ = 0.13%
An additional term equal to 0.1% is added to account for the uncertainty in calculating the flow
equation. This gives a total uncertainty in mass flowrate equal to 0.8237%. When calculated
for standard volume, the uncertainty changes to 0.8337%
4.2 Turbine Meter
Recall the uncertainty model for turbine meters presented in section 2.1.4
EQ2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (17)

Z0
Inserting typical values for each of the terms, we can calculate the uncertainty in standard
volume flowrate. The uncertainty in the actual volume flow rate incorporates a flow calibration
Ep = 0.20%
ET = 0.10%
Ez/zo = 0.20%
Eqv = 0.50%
This equates to an overall uncertainty of 0.58% of reading.
4.3 Ultrasonic Meter
34
EQ2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (33)

Z0
volume flowrate.
Ep = 0.20%
ET = 0.10%
Ez/zo = 0.20%
Eqv = 0.35%
4.4 Coriolis Meter
EQ2 = E q2m + E ρ std (42)
volume flowrate.
Eqm = 0.35%
Eρ = 0.10%
5. SUMMARY
This paper attempts to compare four metering technologies and shed some light on how they
perform under different circumstances with respect to various criteria. The basic operating
principles for each of the meter types is given together with the widely accepted advantages
and disadvantages for each meter.
Four sample applications for different parts of the gas value chain are presented and
solutions developed using each meter type. The comparison is quite simplistic in its
approach, however it is hoped that it will be a good first step when selecting meters for
different applications.
For the case of production metering, it is shown that coriolis meters offer the best CAPEX and
OPEX costs as well as providing the best immunity to process upsets in terms of for
functionality and accuracy. In the transmission application, it is shown that USMs provide the
most economic option both in terms of CAPEX and OPEX . In the case of the gas storage
application, the USM again proves to be the most economic option, while providing the most
robust practical solution. For the distribution example, the coriolis meter proves to be the
optimum solution.
6. NOTATION
A area (m2)
Cd discharge coefficient (-)
D pipe diameter (m)
d orifice diameter (m)
Exi percentage error (%)
f frequency (Hz)
g acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
K turbine meter factor (pulses / m3)
35
L USM path length (m)

P pressure (Pa)
∆P pressure drop (Pa)
Qv standard volume flowrate (Nm3/s)
qm mass flowrate (kg/s)
qv actual volume flowrate (m3/s)
T temperature (K)
tab USM transit time (s)
tba USM transit time (s)
U gas velocity (m/s)
wi USM weighting factors (-)
Z compressibility at line conditions (-)
Z0 compressibility at ref conditions (-)
z vertical position (m)
β diameter ratio (-)
ε expansibility factor (-)
δxi/xi relative uncertainty in xi (-)
ρ density (kg/m3)
7. REFERENCES
[1] ISO5167 (1991): Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure differential devices –
Part 1 : Orifice plates, nozzles and Venturi tubes inserted in circular cross section
conduits running full.
[2] AGA Report No. 3 (2000): Orifice metering of natural gas and other related
hydrocarbon fluids.
[3] ISO 5168 (1978): Measurement of fluid flow – Evaluation of uncertainty of a flowrate
measurement.
[4] ISO 9951 (1994): Measurement of gas flow in closed conduits: Turbine meters.
[5] OIML R 32:
[6] ISOTC30/SC5/WG1: Measurement of gas flow in closed conduits - Ultrasonic meters
[7] AGA Report No. 9, (1998): Measurement of Gas by Multipath Ultrasonic Meters
[8] BSI 7965:2000, The Selection, Installation, Operation and Calibration of Diagonal Path
Transit Time Ultrasonic Flow Meters for Industrial Gas Applications
[9] Terrence Grimley, Ultrasonic Meter Installation Configuration Testing, AGA Operations
Conference, Denver, Colorado, 2000
[10] Per Lunde et al (2001): Handbook of uncertainty calculations ultrasonic fiscal gas
metering stations.
[11] Klaus Zanker (1999): The effects of Reynolds number, wall roughness and profile
asymmetry on single and multipath ultrasonic meters. NSFMW
[12] ISOTC30/SC12: TBA
[13} AGA engineering technical note on coriolis flow measurement for natural gas
applications.
[14] Klaus Zanker (2000): The performance of an ultrasonic meter in wet gas service.
NSFMW.
36

An in Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies Orifice Turbine Ultrasonic and Coriolisl PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An in Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies Orifice Turbine Ultrasonic and Coriolisl PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An in Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies Orifice Turbine Ultrasonic and Coriolisl PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index

An In Depth Comparison of Four Gas

An In Depth Comparison of Four Gas Measurement Technologies;

Fig 1 Gas Value Chain

2.1 Orifice Meter

2.1.1 International Standards

2.1.2 Orifice Flowmeter Overview

Fig 2 The Senior Fitting

Fig 3 'Catch All' ISO5167 Meter Tube

2.1.3 Theory of Operation

Fig 4 Orifice Flow Meter Pressure Profile

Conservation of mass for incompressible flow states;

The relative uncertainty in the discharge coefficient is stated to be;

• 0.5% for β ≤ 0.6, OR

The relative uncertainty in the expansibility factor can be calculated using

2.1.4 Advantages and Disadvantages

Table 1 Advantages and Disadvantages For Orifice Meters

Well documented in standards Pulsating flow

2.2 Turbine Meter

2.2.1 International Standards

2.2.2 Turbine Meter Overview

Fig 5 Turbine Meter Components

Fig 6 Typical Turbine Meter Tube

2.2.3 Theory of Operation

qmin(act) = minimum volume flowrate at actual pressure (m3/hr)

The uncertainty in the flow measurement may be determined by

The percentage uncertainty in the reference volume is calculated using;

E Q2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (16)

2.2.4 Advantages and Disadvantages

Table 2 Advantages and Disadvantages For Turbine Meters

Good accuracy over linear flow range Requires flow calibration

2.3 Ultrasonic Meters

2.3.1 International Standards

2.3.2 Ultrasonic Meter Overview

Fig 7 USM Components

Fig 8 Ultrasonic Meter Tube

2.3.3 Theory of Operation

The measurement principle is described analytically as follows;

Fig 9 USM Operating Principle

q vpt = c pv 0 .ctv 0 .qusm (23)

q v = K .usm c pvc .ctvc .qusm (26)

The volume flowrate at standard reference conditions is calculated using

, ∆ = E rad , ∆ + E chord , ∆ + E angle , ∆

EQ2 = E p2 + ET2 + E Z2 + E q2v (33)

E q2m = E ρ2 + E q2v (34)

2.3.4 Advantages and Disadvantages

Table 3 Advantages and Disadvantages For Ultrasonic Meters

No flow calibration required Not fully accepted by industry

2.4 Coriolis Flowmeters

2.4.1 International Standards

2.4.2 Coriolis Meter Overview

Fig 10 Coriolis Meter

Fig 11 Coriolis Meter Tube Layout

2.4.3 Theory of Operation

An analytical description follows;

Fig. 12 Analytical Description of Coriolis Meter Principle

∆FC = 2.ϖ .v.δm (37)

∆FC = 2.ω .v.ρ . A.∆x (38)

The transverse Coriolis force can therefore be expressed as