Flowmeter Calibration, Proving, &

Verification
Throughout industry, flowmeter accuracy and repeatability
are scrutinized with different criteria to ensure confidence in
a particular application.

Throughout industry, flowmeter accuracy and repeatability are scrutinized with different criteria
to ensure confidence in a particular application. In utility environments, for example, a
government body may require a flowmeter to meet minimum accuracy and repeatability
standards. In others, say private industry for example, in-house specifications are likely the
source for accuracy and repeatability standards. Whatever the case, be it a government-mandated
standard or an internal performance requirement, flowmeter accuracy and repeatability are of the
utmost importance.

There are a variety of methods users can employ in an effort to ensure flowmeter performance,
but the terminology for describing such practices is oft used interchangeably despite the unique
nature of different practices.

In some applications, flow meter verification will satisfy requirements for meter performance
within a defined tolerance of the original manufactured state. In other applications, however, a
traceable calibration is required to fulfill this requirement. And some other scenarios may require
in-field proving of the meter to instill confidence in its performance in a specific system.

These techniques, which are the most prominent methods for ensuring flow meter accuracy and
repeatability, have inherent differences and can be a good fit in many environments, depending
on the requirements of the application under consideration.

Calibration
There are several design standards for calibration systems. These may include, but are not
limited to, volumetric methods, gravimetric methods, and master meter comparison. These
methods can produce results with an uncertainty of better than 4-to-1 as compared with the meter
to be tested.

In addition, there are standards that govern and encompass the entire calibration system. NIST
and ISO 17025 define standards and requirements with varying degrees of complexity for
calibration facilities and procedures. The National Institute of Standards and Technologies, or
NIST, defines standards for traceability that reside with the individual laboratory for
maintenance or self-compliance. ISO 17025 is a more rigorous, third-party accreditation. This
standard encompasses the entire calibration system and produces metrics for the calibration rig
components, administrative systems for process operations, personnel proficiency, and
documentation supporting the traceability and total measurement uncertainty for the entire
calibration facility. ISO 17025 standards ensure the highest level of confidence in accuracy and
repeatability.

The term calibration is reserved for manufacturers that use traceable standards to establish or
correct factors specific to an individual meter. As part of the calibration process, the meter to be
tested is compared with the laboratory master standard. ISO 17025-certified meters can achieve
+/- 0.05 percent accuracy.

The calibration process can take place under two basic scenarios, i.e., as last step in the original
manufacturing process or for re-calibration. In simple terms, the purpose of calibration is to
determine whether deviations are present due to manufacturing or whether they have occurred
from process usage.

In the first instance, the device output signal is adjusted to match the target value of the
calibration system. Although special calibration protocols exist, the process is generally a two-
point process. The goal is to check and establish the zero point stability when appropriate. Once
established, further points within the range are used to check the linearity of the meter to be
tested. These points are often repeated to ensure the proper adjustment according to observed
performance. Uncertainty can then be identified and accounted for to ensure that a linear and
repeatable flowmeter can realize final delivery.

In a re-calibration scenario, an operational flowmeter is returned to a laboratory for the purpose

of creating up-to-date documentation to ensure meter conformance to a traceable standard or to
rectify mechanical and electronic deviations in the meter as a result of sensor aging or
component drift.

In-Field Proving
In-field proving can be done in-situ in a customer application or out of process with a flow
proving cart, master meter, transfer standard, or scale. Meter proving allows a master meter to be
piped in series with the device under test. Care must be taken to limit partially filled pipes,
pressure losses, velocity effects, or flow profile influence when installing a master meter in the
process piping. The master meter can be a meter with the same or higher accuracy to confirm
agreement with the meter to be tested. For example, measuring uncertainties of +/- 0.1% of rate
are achievable with modern flowmeters.

The level of accuracy for a proving meter should match the customer’s expectations for the
proving process. Testing runs can be made at continuous flow or totalized directly for
comparison. Unlike the controlled conditions of a calibration laboratory, field-proving
competency resides with the owner of the master meter, employed practices, and ability to
reproduce test conditions over the lifecycle of the process meter.
 These small Flow proving is sometimes used as a method to modify a flowmeter’s
calibration systems calibration factor to match the master meter standard. Field proving may
support line sizes provide a justification for removal and return of the process meter to a
from flow calibration facility or laboratory for an “as found” calibration to
one millimeter rectify the deviations and re-establish the output factors in accordance
to ½” lines. with the manufacturer’s specified tolerances.
Flow proving cart component meters, master meters, or transfer
standards are usually sent back to the respective manufacturer or appropriate authority for
traceable calibrations to ensure they provide a proper metric for on-site proving. Installation
guidelines for the proving meter/standard are vital to ensure the proving standard traceability is
transferable to the field installation it is intended to prove. It is also important that all electrical
area classifications are considered when designing and applying flow proving carts, master
meters, or transfer standards. There are often multiple classifications within a plant that should
be observed.

Using a nonintrusive ultrasonic flowmeter is an ideal situation in many applications. This

practice should not be generally confused with proving as described earlier in the article.
Ultrasonic flowmeters are generally able to produce results that are at the 2-5 percent of rate
accuracy level. This is typically less accurate than themeter to be tested. It can, however, be used
to provide a sense of confidence to verify that the meter to be tested is performing satisfactorily
within an expected range.

The two latter methods — electronic verification and nonintrusive comparison — are quite
practical and economical in the correct applications. Not only do they allow for simple checks to
ensure the primary measuring device is functioning satisfactorily, they are portable and allow for
repeated use across a broad range of installations. Limitations on measuring accuracy and the
suitability of data must be taken into account.

Verification

Flowmeter verification is often used as a confirmation of long-term

sensor or transmitter stability. Verifications can be electronic
simulations that do not involve actual flow or process comparisons
These large-scale under flowing conditions.
calibration systems
are capable of Electronic verification does not include a wet test of the process meter.
handling line sizes The electronic verification device coupled with integral meter
exceeding diagnostics can detect changes in the sensor geometry from coating,
78 inches. erosion, or corrosion for example. In general, however, the electronic
verification is used to investigate electronic component drift, transmitter or converter errors, or
hardware failure. These tests can be confirmed or compared with the original manufacturer
tolerances and

specifications over the process meter lifecycle.

 Verification devices can store past tests so they can be reviewed or
compared over the flowmeter lifecycle. These tests can be stored as
read-only electronic files or printed for hardcopy review. As an option,
Handheld devices and electronic flowmeter verification can be provided at the time of
software available for manufacturing to create a baseline analysis from which to judge the
verifying meters long-term changes that occur in a tested sensor or transmitter
electronically can component. Repeat field verification tests can show long-term change in
interrogate metering meter stability. In some cases, verification tests may be used as a means
devices for the to satisfy quality systems, government, or agency requirements. A field
purpose of long-term verification activity can be carried out in-situ or offline.
stability checks in the
field with limited or Electronic verification tools should be periodically returned to the
no original manufacturer or laboratory to ensure proper functionality and
loss in production. calibration of electrical components.

Another method for verifying flowmeter operability in-situ is by

comparing an additional flowmeter or flowmeter technology. This can
be an insertion meter, such as a hot-tap differential pressure, magnetic,
Engineered systems or ultrasonic device. In many cases, however, a nonintrusive ultrasonic
for in-plant proving flowmeter is a better fit because no process interruption is necessary.
carts often use Nonintrusive devices can be used when pipe diameter, pipe wall
Coriolis technology thickness, and sound velocity characteristics are known. Typically, the
due to increased manufacturer produces coefficients and values that relate to the pipe and
accuracy over most all fluid types for meter commissioning. For example, the speed of sound in
other technologies and a liquid to be evaluated for flow comparison is required for ultrasonic
the ability to commissioning, but is not necessary for magnetic flowmetering. In
minimize real estate addition, the fluid characteristics to be tested should remain somewhat
by eliminating constant during the time of comparison. These characteristics include,
unnecessary straight for example, fluid density, concentration of chemical solutions, and
runs with compact temperature.
designs.
The Importance of Performance
Flowmeter performance is definitely critical for all plant operations. The degree of application
criticality must, however, be decided at the plant level to ensure the proper maintenance program
is applied for all flowmetering devices.
In an optimum situation, verification, calibration, and proving can all be used in harmony to
ensure the desired tolerances of the entire installed base are maintained. But it can be difficult to
employ an optimum program for all applications. Therefore it is important for leading plant
personnel to hold ongoing discussion to determine the appropriate maintenance program.

Verification
 certificates from an These discussions should determine if the meter is used for quality
electronic verification control, regulated production control, plant operations, or utilities.
device illustrate Proper planning should take place to procure the appropriate methods,
several test points and logistics, and tolerances for meter maintenance. For example, planners
the suitability of the should determine what meters must be calibrated by the original
meter to remain in manufacturer to ensure the highest level of certainty in the device and
process with a degree what devices are candidates for electronic verification by the end-user.
of confidence that it is Simply put, the user must determine what devices require 1.0 percent of
working with little or rate accuracy or better and what devices are acceptable at 2-5 percent of
no deviation from the rate accuracy.
original installation. Taking full advantage of the available technology for verification,
calibration, and proving should produce a mix of services and
maintenance for the installed base. Properly segmented, these services can result in increased
production time, improved maintenance planning, reduction in spare meter inventory, and less
costs associated with meter ownership.

About the Author

Jerry Stevens is the business manager of Endress+Hauser’s Flow Products Division. He has 24
years of experience in the specification, sales, and technical support of flow products. Mr.
Stevens attended IUPUI in Indianapolis where he studied Mechanical Engineering and Business
Marketing. Jason Pennington has worked in application engineering, business development for
liquid analytical products, and most recently as a product manager for flowmetering technology
at Endress+Hauser. He studied Electrical Engineering at Purdue University''s Indianapolis
Campus. Mr. Pennington can be reached at jason.pennington@us.endress.com or 888-
ENDRESS.