Devices and methods for wet gas flow metering: A comprehensive review

Salehi, Seyed Milad; Lao, Liyun; Xing, Lanchang; Simms, Nigel; Drahm, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2023.102518

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The commonly used wet gas meter is a 'hybrid type wet gas meter', which consists of two or more single-phase meters combined in series. Among hybrid type wet gas meters, it is more likely to apply a void fraction meter to estimate the wetness [2]. While this approach enhances measurement reliability, it also leads to higher costs and increased complexity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of A Coriolis Gas Flow Meter to Steady and Transient Wet Gas Flow Conditions

Salehi,

Lao,

Simms

et al. 2024

Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coriolis devices are continuously evolving to meet the demands of different conditions, such as wet gas flow. However, their application in wet gas flow has not yet been thoroughly explored. The impact of steady flow disturbances on Coriolis flow meters is well-documented, and empirical compensation or correction methods can be implemented accordingly. However, there has been inadequate investigation into the response of Coriolis meters under transient flow conditions and their comparison with steady flow in a wet gas. In this study, a Coriolis device was horizontally installed in a 50 mm pipe diameter. The experimental fluids consisted of air and water, with Lockhart-Martinelli (XLM) values ranging from 0.02 to 0.40. Steady and transient flow conditions at different gas and liquid flow rates were studied. The findings demonstrate the capability of standard deviation (STD) in distinguishing transient flow from steady one. Additionally, a strong correlation was observed between XLM and gas Over-Reading (OR) across various gas flow rates and XLM values. This correlation is particularly evident for XLM < 0.1. At extremely low liquid loading (XLM < 0.05), the average percentage error remains below 7 % even without the utilization of any correction models. Furthermore, the impact of different sensor installations, which had been largely overlooked in previous studies, was investigated.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%