Final report "Key comparison CCM.FF-K1.2015 - water flow: 30 m3/h ... 200 m3/h"

被引:3
|
作者
Furuichi N. [1 ]
Arias R. [2 ]
Yang C.-T. [3 ]
Chun S. [4 ]
Meng T. [5 ]
Shinder I. [6 ]
Frahm E. [7 ]
Büker O. [8 ]
Mills C. [9 ]
Akselli B. [10 ]
Smits F.M. [11 ]
机构
[1] NMIJ/AIST - National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, National Metrology Institute of Japan, Fluid Flow Division, Aist Tsukuba Central 3, 1-1-1 Umezono, Tsukuba
[2] Cenam - Centro Nacional de Metrología, km 4.5 carretera a los Cués, El Marqués, Qro., México
[3] Itri - Industrial Technology Research Institute, Center for Measurement Standards, Bldg. 16, No. 321, Sec. 2, Kuang-Fu Rd., Chinese Taipei, Hsinchu
[4] Kriss - Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Thermometry and Fluid Flow Metrology Group, Division of Physical Metrology, 205A-dong 101-ho, Gajeong-ro 267, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon
[5] Nim - National Institute of Metrology, Division of Thermometry and Material Evaluation, No. 18 Bei San Huan Dong Lu, Chaoyang District, Beijing
[6] Nist - National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Dr, Gaithersburg, 20899, MD
[7] Ptb - Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Department 1.5 Liquid Flow, Bundesallee 100, Braunschweig
[8] Rise - Research Institutes of Sweden, Measurement Science and Technology, Brinellgatan 4, Borås
[9] Tüv Süd National Engineering Laboratory, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride, Glasgow
[10] Tubitak Ume - National Metrology Institute, Fluid Mechanics Laboratory, Baris Mah. Dr. Zeki Acar cad. No: 1, Gebze/Kocaeli
[11] Vsl - National Metrology Institute, Thijsseweg 11, Delft
关键词
Calibration - Flow measurement - Flow of water - Flowmeters - Hydraulics - Turbines - Uncertainty analysis;
D O I
10.1088/0026-1394/59/1A/07013
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Main text The objective of the Key Comparison CCM.FF-K1.2015 for water flow measurement was to support and prove the Calibration and Measurement Capabilities (CMC) of the participating NMIs of Japan (AIST), Mexico (CENAM), Chinese Taipei (ITRI), Korea (KRISS), P.R. China (NIM), Germany (PTB), USA (NIST), Sweden (RISE), UK (NEL), Turkey (TUBITAK UME) and Netherlands (VSL). The comparison was organized as a round robin, started in December 2015 at PTB and finished in April 2018, also at PTB. As pilot laboratory, the national metrology institute of Germany (PTB) organised the comparison. A combined setup of a turbine meter and Coriolis meter was used as a transfer standard (TS), which was provided by the pilot laboratory. The nominal calibration conditions of the KC were defined within the flow range between 30 m3/h and 200 m3/h, 20 °C fluid temperature and 3 bar line pressure. A special focus of the comparison was to estimate the uncertainties of the transfer standard (u TS). Both transfer meters were subjected to extensive characterization measurements at pilot laboratory, with the following investigated parameters: fluid temperature, line pressure, repeatability, flow stability, meter sensitivity to varying inflow conditions and hysteresis effects. For turbine meter, all labs passed the E N criteria of ≤ 1.20. The calibrations of the turbine meter were strongly affected by the presence of the large values for u TS with > 0.12 % k =1) which were mainly caused by the meter sensitivity to disturbed inflow conditions. This effect led to inconclusive calibration results for all laboratories. The evaluation criteria u comp/u base exceeded the critical value of 2.00. Finally, the turbine meter was not suitable for a confirmation of all submitted CMC values. For Coriolis meter, all labs passed the E N criteria of ≤ 1.20. In contrast to turbine meter, the evaluation criteria u comp/u base exceeded the critical value of 2.00 for one laboratory, only. The maximum uncertainty u TS of Coriolis meter was estimated with 0.022 % (k =1). In summary, the comparison was successfully finished for a confirmation of the submitted CMC values, related to mass calibrations. For volume related CMCs this comparison was not suitable. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database https://www.bipm.org/kcdb/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA). © 2022 BIPM & IOP Publishing Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] EUROMET Project 852: A comparison between Italian and Swiss gas flow standards in the range 0.3 m3/h to 25 m3/h
    Baumann, Henri
    Cignolo, Giorgio
    Clausen, Mario
    Goria, Roberto
    METROLOGIA, 2008, 45
  • [2] Final report on the CIPM air speed key comparison (CCM.FF-K3)
    Terao, Yoshiya
    van der Beek, Mijndert
    Yeh, T. T.
    Mueller, Harald
    METROLOGIA, 2007, 44
  • [3] Calibration of hydrometer for cold water of nominal flow of 1,5 m3/h
    Neto, Ermes Costa
    de Lima, Matheus
    Rolim, Tiago Leite
    ENGENHARIA SANITARIA E AMBIENTAL, 2021, 26 (04) : 793 - 803
  • [4] Final Report on the APMP Air Speed Key Comparison (APMP.M.FF-K3)
    Terao, Yoshiya
    Choi, Yong Moon
    Gutkin, Mikhail
    Jian, Wu
    Shinder, Iosif
    Yang, Cheng-Tsair
    METROLOGIA, 2010, 47
  • [5] Final Report on the Key Comparison of Hydrocarbon Liquid Flow: CCM.FF-K2.2015
    Shimada, Takashi
    Bittner-Rohrhofer, Karin
    Medina Lopez, Victor J.
    Arias R, Roberto
    Su, Chun-Min
    Chen, I-Cheng
    Ribere, Fabien
    Rowan, Linda
    Dignan, Simon
    METROLOGIA, 2016, 53
  • [6] Final report on the CCM key comparison of kilogram realizations CCM.M-K8.2021
    Stock M.
    Conceição P.
    Fang H.
    Bielsa F.
    Kiss A.
    Nielsen L.
    Beaudoux F.
    Espel P.
    Thomas M.
    Ziane D.
    Baumann H.
    Eichenberger A.
    Marti K.
    Bai Y.
    Hu M.
    Li Z.
    Lu Y.
    Peng C.
    Wang J.
    Wang Y.
    Wu D.
    Abbott P.
    Haddad D.
    Kubarych Z.
    Mulhern E.
    Schlamminger S.
    Newell D.
    Fujita K.
    Inaba H.
    Kano K.
    Kuramoto N.
    Mizushima S.
    Okubo S.
    Ota Y.
    Zhang L.
    Davidson S.
    Green R.G.
    Liard J.O.
    Murnaghan N.F.
    Wood B.M.
    Borys M.
    Eppers D.
    Knopf D.
    Kuhn E.
    Hämpke M.
    Müller M.
    Nicolaus A.
    Scholz F.
    Spoors M.
    Ahmedov H.
    Metrologia, 2023, 60 (1 A)
  • [7] CCM.FF-K3.2011: Final report for the CIPM key comparison of air speed, 0.5 m/s to 40 m/s
    Mueller, Harald
    Care, Isabelle
    Lucas, Peter
    Pachinger, Dietmar
    Kurihara, Noboru
    Lishui, Cui
    Su, Chun-Min
    Shinder, Losif
    Spazzini, Pier Giorgio
    METROLOGIA, 2017, 54
  • [8] Final Report CCM.V-K3: CCM Key Comparison of Viscosity
    Fujita, Y.
    Zubler, T.
    Mastropierro, J.
    Trujillo, S.
    Cekiel, I.
    Malta, D.
    Lorefice, S.
    Ballereau, P.
    Meury, P. A.
    Zhang, Z.
    Wolf, H.
    Trochta, D.
    Sakarya, O.
    Van Andel, I.
    Buchner, C.
    Spohr, I.
    Furtado, A.
    Lugadiru, B.
    Mekawy, M.
    Jonker, D.
    Kumar, A.
    Anuar, Z.
    METROLOGIA, 2018, 55
  • [9] H-equipackable paths and cycles for H = P4 and H = M3
    Zhang, Yuqin
    Sun, Yajing
    ARS COMBINATORIA, 2009, 93 : 387 - 391
  • [10] THE H-R DIAGRAMS FOR THE GLOBULAR CLUSTERS M92 AND M3
    ARP, HC
    BAUM, WA
    SANDAGE, AR
    ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL, 1952, 57 (01): : 4 - 5