A power law approach to orifice flow rate calibration

Rhinehart, R. Russell; Gebreyohannes, Solomon; Sridhar, Upasana Manimegalai; Patrachari, Anirudh R.; Rahaman, Md. Saifur

doi:10.1016/j.isatra.2011.01.005

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5 exhibited wide variations depending on the flow rate, which made defining a single value for the entire measurement range difficult. This difficulty led to insecurity on how to define C d using this method, and employing an average value could be inappropriate (Rhinehart et al, 2011). The angular coefficient of a zero-intercept straight line approximates C d .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of models to determine flow rate using orifice plates

Cano

Camargo

Muniz

et al. 2021

Rev. bras. eng. agríc. ambient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate three methodologies for orifice-plate water-flow estimation by quantifying errors in the flow determinations to propose an appropriate measurement range for each evaluated condition. Two orifice-plate models (nominal diameters of 100 and 150 mm) with 50% restriction in the flow section were evaluated. In the theoretical equations, the discharge coefficient was obtained using the Reader-Harris/Gallagher equation (Method 1) and approximated from experimental data using the angular coefficient of a zero-intercept straight line (Method 2). The recommended measurement ranges for errors that were lower than 5% for the 100 and 150 mm plates were 30 to 65 m3 h-1 and 70 to 130 m3 h-1 using the theoretical equation and 20 to 65 m3 h-1 and 40 to 130 m3 h-1 using the empirical equation, respectively. The Reader-Harris/Gallagher equation (Method 1) adequately estimated the discharge coefficient of the orifice plates; however, the use of empirical equations (Method 3) demonstrated smaller measurement errors and greater rangeability of the evaluated flow meters.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of models to determine flow rate using orifice plates

Cano

Camargo

Muniz

et al. 2021

Rev. bras. eng. agríc. ambient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under turbulent flow conditions, it is common for valves and orifices to show a power-law relation between flow rate and pressure drop. 17,18 Therefore, it seems appropriate to express the variation of C d as a power function of Reynolds number Re.…”

Section: Measured Steady Discharge Coefficientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct Drive Valve Model for Use as an Acoustic Source in a Network Model

Müller¹,

Hermann²,

Polifke³

2016

IJAV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Direct Drive Valves (DDVs) can be used as acoustic actuators in duct systems when requirements on mechanical or thermal robustness are high, e.g., for the active control of aerodynamic or combustion instabilities. This paper presents a model of a DDV that is used as an active element in an acoustic network model. In acoustic network modelling tools, acoustic sources are often implemented as simple velocity or mass flow boundary conditions. In practice, however, DDVs are not necessarily situated at the boundary of the system and the throughflow depends on the fluctuating pressure drop over the valve. This paper presents an acoustically compact model, based on mass conservation and a time-varying hydraulic resistance. The resistance depends on the fluctuating valve opening. The results are compared to the experiment in terms of acoustic wave transfer function. NOMENCLATURE A Area m 2 C d Discharge coefficient [−] D Transmission coefficient of an acoustic delay [−] L Length [m] M Mach number [−] Q Gas flow rate in norm litre per minute [NLPM] R Reflection coefficient [−] R sys Combined reflection coefficient of an acoustic system [−] Re Reynolds number [−] S Source coefficient [(m/s) /%] S sys Combined source coefficient of an acoustic system [(m/s) /%] T Transmission coefficient [−] V Volume m 3 c Speed of sound [m/s] f Downstream characteristic wave amplitude [m/s] g Upstream characteristic wave amplitude [m/s] p Pressure [Pa] p 0 Total (stagnation) pressure [Pa] r Radius [m] t Time [s] u Velocity [m/s] x, y, z Coordinates [m] x sp Valve (spool) opening [%] ζ Hydraulic loss coefficient [−] ρ Density kg/m 3 • Time-averaged quantity • Perturbation on time-averaged quantitẏ • Rate of change / flow[•/s]

show abstract

“…Another study [8] proposed to relax the square root relation commonly used by international standards to determine the flow rate through a specific discharge coefficient value. The resulting power law relation was shown to improve accuracy.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%