Proving by master meter method

Ken Payne 1 & Didier Pabois 2

1. Senior Measurement Specialist. AMEC, Aberdeen
2. Vzce President ofEngineering, Faure Herman Intertechnique, France

Introduction ditions, this verification involves draining and breaching

hydrocarbon systems to enable connection via flexible
The purpose of this paper is to contrast the design and hoses of a small volume portable praver. This gives expo-
application of a fiscal turbine master meters and prover sure to risk of a possible hydrocarbon release to the envi-
loop metering systems and to discuss the relative merits of ronment. Consideration at conceptual design should be
both but concentrating on turbine master meters. given to the operability and maintainability of this method
Nonnally the required accuracy of export fiscal meters is due to its complexities. At any time wh.en hydrocarbon
stipulated and agreed by the relevant parties, and important- systems are breached there is a potential risk to the safety
ly, the catibration must be traceable to a known reference. of personnel, tbis risk must be removed or minimised.
Detecting inaccuracies within measurement systems is cru-
cial if maintenance of accurate data is to be obtained. Turbine Master Meter system
Especially where there are strong commercial linkages
between oil and gas operators who rely on and are totally Employing a master meter system would normally occupy
dependent on, the integrity of high quality metering systems. no more space than an extra meter run. It is simple in its
design and reduces operation and maintenance interven-
Conventional Prayer Loop tion to the absolute minimum, periodic replacement of the
master meter (every six months) involves the minimum of
A typical liquid metering station would consist of a num- hydrocarbon breaching there by reducing the risk of an
ber metering streams and prover loop fitted with pressure, environmental spill. Tunbine master meter may be consid-
temperature, density devices and turbine flow meters. The ered for metering stations which have reducing flow rates
metering station should have the facilities to divert the where the impact of error in the measurement uncertainty
flow of each of the individual turbine meters through the is not significant enough to cause undue concern.
prover loop. There is a requirement for these meters to be A turbine master meter is selected., maintained, and oper-
proved to ensure that the accuracy of the measurement of ated to serve as a reference device for proving of another
the liquid is maintained. Historically the prefered method meter. A comparison of the master meter to delivery meter
of proving turbine meters is via a conventional praver output is the basis of the master-meter proving method.
loop. The prover loop is a reference device that has a Prior to proving with a master meter, the master Meter
known volume (swept volume) between two switches, as must have been proved against a conventional prover
the sphere activates each switch it starts and stops an inte- loop. The Master Meter Factor is determined by the aver-
gration of pulses. This count is compared with the stream age Meter Factor of at least 5 consecutive meter proofs and
meter and a meter factor is then determined. Turbine must fall within ± 005% of the average.
meters vary in construction from multi bladed meters to Installed downstream of the hne meter being proved, a
the two bladed Heli Flu meter. Magnets are sealed,in to the turbine master meter should be a complete assembly com-
tips of the bade that excite two pick up coils as the blades prising of a pre-run flow straightening device, this assem-
rotate. The pick up coils are 90° out of phase, allowing for bly should jf possible remain intact during transportation
pulse integrity checking. and operation.
A number of factors should be taken into consideration
when selecting this method of proving. Operational Considerations

o Prover loops tend to use up valuable space and weight Both the master meter and stream meter to be proved
o Expensive to install. should be equipped with meter proving registers and coun-
o Expensive to recertify. ters connected so that all counters can be started and
o Labour intensive to re certify. stopped simultaneously. The master meter flow computer
o Are maintenance intensive due to fai lures of 4 way valve receives a dual pulse train from the master meter and auto-
seals, sphere detector switches & spheres. matically checks for reports pulse errors indicating jf a
o The costs of carrying out these exercises are high. problem exists.
o Praver loops are a high accuracy devices and are the pre- The master meter· flow computer receives the pulses
ferred method for proving meters measuring high volume from the stream on proof via tbe common pulse highway.
flow rates in contrast to master meters. These pulses are then used in the proving calculations.
Risk assessment has indicated that there are safety and A single proof run consists of a minimum of 10,000
environmental issues surrounding the historical method of pulses being detected from the master turbine meter and
proving meters. Normally the volume in the prover loop then compared to the stream meter pulses. This process is
will be recertified annually depending on the service con- repeated until five consecutive proof runs are completed to
146 Measurement + Control. Volume 35. June 2002
 Proving by master meter method - Payne & Pabios

. ..

Figure J: A typical sequence ofproving with master meter. Figure 3: Proving conditions line 1.

Figure 4: Normal flowing condition line J - Bi directional

ball prover.

ass than 5 runs Ye.

completed

No

I AbortProve ~Yes ore then 10 run$

c.omple:ted

No
Figure 5: Proving condition line 1 - Bi-directional ball prover:
No satisfy the meter K-factor tolerance. If this tolerance is not
achieved within the maximum number of IUns (nonnally
Ye. ten) the proof is aborted. This system is also applied when
using a conventional prover loop.

Advantages of turbine master meter

Ye.

No
1. Master meter systems cost approximately 40 % less
than conventional prover loop.
2. Master meters are more compact than traditional sys-
tems (weight and space)
3. Using master meter simplifies the maintenance of the
metering system.
4. More reliable due to less mechanical parts (no 4 way
valve, no sphere detectors, no sphere, ...)
5. Calibration of the master meter can be carried out on
Figure 2: Normal flowing condition line 1. or off site.

Measurement + Control, Volume 35, June 2002 147

Proving by master meter method - Payne & Pabios

-- - + - CalibraUon 09/02100 -: The graph shows a prove carried out at

1.003000
i ••..•• .f.(l.1%
I the Faure Herman calibration facility
...... .0.1% and demonstrates the repeatability
_x-UPCURVE
following six months in service as a
1.002000
_DOWN
._._~
CURVE
---~.-
-_ . master meter on crude oil proving on
...... average twice per week. The
'.
1.001000 .. , " .' , . '
calibration is carried out as near to the
... -_ ... - ... .. '
original process flowing conditions as
JS ",

~~
the original calibration. The blue line
1.00‫סס‬oo marked ( • ) shows the main
" calibration of five proof runs at each of
'" "-.
.. '.
~

.. ....
,.' the selected flow rates. Two further
0.999000 "
'. ", ..... -., ,., .. .. ' runs were carried out with single proof
at each flow rate up and down the
0.998000 across the meter flow range these are
marked red line down ( ) and the
blacK line up (x ). The graph shows the
0.997000 meter is repeatable and can be used
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
with a matrix (curve fitting)
FloWTate

Figure 6: Typical Master Meter calibration curve carried out at calibration facility,
6. Accuracy is better than ± 0.15 % ISVm = Indicated standard volume metered by
7. Repeatability is better than ± 0,02 % stream (Sm 3)
8. It should be noted that 6 & 7 above do not differ from
the conventional prover loop. GSVmm = IVmm*CCFmm
9. Heliflu meters are robust and require very little mainte-
nance. HELIFLU'" turbine flowmeters can be found in a Where,
wide range of applications with major companies involved
in oil, chemical, nuclear, gas, automotive, aeronautical and IV mm Indicated volume through
food industries. master meter (m2:)

Calculations CCFmm = Combined correction factor for mater

meter at proving conditions
The following is the calculation is used to determine a new
meter factor when using a turbine master meter system. CCFmm = Ctl mm *Cp1mm *Cpsmm *Cts mm

Determine Stream Meter K Factor Where,

The meter K-factor calculation used in the master meter Ctl mm = Correction for the effect of temperature
flow computer is in accordance with the API Manual of on a liquid in the master meter
Petroleum Measurement Standards (Chapter 12.2.3, 1998 -
section 12.3.2; Chapter 11.2.1 M, 1984 and Chapter 11.1, Cp1mm = Correction for compressibility on a liquid
Volume X, Table 54A (Generalised Crude Oils), 1980) in the master Meter
with:
CTS Correction for the effect of temperature Cts mm = Correction for the effect of temperature
on steel on the steel of the master meter
CPS Correction for the effect of pressure on
steel CPSmm = Correction for the effect of pressure on
CTL Conection for the effect of temperature the steel of the master meter
on the liquid
CPL Correction for the effect of compressibility IV mm = nmm/MKF mm
of the liquid
N Number of pulses Where,
MKF Meter K factor
m Stream Meter n mm = Recorded pulses though master meter
mm Master Meter
MKFmm = Master meter K-factor (pulses/m 3)
The development of the calculation used In the flow
computer is shown below:- ISV m = IV m *CCF m
GSV mm
MF Where,
ISV m
Where, IV m = Indicated volume through stream (m2:)
MF = Meter Factor (dimensionless)
CCFm = Combined correction factor for stream at
GSVmm = Gross standard volume metered by proving Conditions
master meter (Sm 3)

148 Measurement + Control, Volume 35, June 2002

 Using system dynamics modelling - Stupples

CCFm = Ctlm *Cplm *Cts m *Cpsm maximum of 10 calibration runs. The proof is accepted if
the calculated average stream turbine meter K factor is
Where, within the required deviation limits 0.05% and should be
checked against a meter factor control chart.
Ctlm = Correction for the effect of temperature
on a liquid in the stream. (Max. - stream - MKF) - (min. - stream - MKF)I
Cp1m = Correction for compressibility of liquid
I (Average - MKF)
in the stream. ,;; Allowed l\:Ieter Kf deviation

Cts m = Correction for the effect of temperature If a valid proof is not achieved, the flow computer auto-
on the steel of the stream meter. matically performs more proof runs, until the last five suc-
cessive runs satisfy the above criteria. If after 10 proof
CPSm = Correction for the effect of pressure on runs, a valid proof has not been achieved, then the proof is
the steel of the stream meter. aborted and an alarm is raised.

Recommendations
Where,
I. Consideration should be given to use of master meter
nm = Recorded pulses though steam for low volume flow rates.
2. Use of master meter should be considered where weight
MKF m = Stream meter K-factor (pulses/m::':) or space restrictions apply.
3. Use of master meter should be considered on unrnanned
Therefore, the meter factor can be expressed as follows:- installations due to its simple construction.
4. Cost of a master meter system is nominally 40% less
than that of a conventional prover loop system.
MF = nmm *rt1
~Al1Ill
*Cplnun *0.: *rn.,
~'1TlIll ~lll1IJ1
*:MKFmm
5. Consider use of conventional prover where high flow
nm *CtIm *Cplm *Ctsm *~ *:MKFmm rates are encountered.
6. Consider use of conventional prover where weight and
The new stream meter K-factor can be expressed in space restrictions don't apply, this is also flow dependent.
terms of the current stream meter k-factor and the meter
factor as follows:- Conclusions
Current - MKFm
New MKF m = MF I hope I have stimulated some thoughts which set the con-
text for more detailed discussions. Innovation is vital to
future prosperity and future of the oil and gas industry.
Therefore the new stream meter k-factor is calculated as The oil industry tends to spend less on R & 0 than it has
follows:- in the past. The competition for funds is becoming more
nm *CtIm *Cplm *Ctsm *~ *:MKFmm intense. The solutions are becoming more complex, with
New MKF m = increasing pressure for results. Further work is required in
nmm *CtImm *Cplmm *Ctsmm *CJlsmm the area of master meters and consideration should be
given to coriolis and ultra sonic flow meters.
The above calculation is performed on a run basis and
stored for onward transmission to the MSC for inclusion in References
the proof reports. For each run result, the data used are the
averages calculated. For the overall result, the data used are 1. API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards Chapter 12
section 2 Calculation of petroleum quantities.
the averages over the last five consecutive proof runs.
2. API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards Chapter 4
This sequence is repeated for a minimum of 5 and a section 5 Master Meter Provers.

Measurement + Control, Volume 35, June 2002149