De La Salle University

Mechanical Engineering Department

Module No. 4

Air Flow Meters

NAME : Nygel Gian Santillan

SUBJECT & SECTION : LBYME3B EE3

INSTRUCTOR : Engr. Isidro Antonio Marfori

RATING: _________

REMARKS: ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

1
Objective
• To make a comparative study of different flow metering devices such as Venturi meter, orifice
meter, nozzles and Pitot tube.

Materials and Equipment

• Air flow demonstration unit

• Manometer
• Barometer
• Pitot tube, orifice and Venturi meter
• Vernier caliper
• Sling psychrometer

Experiment Set-up

Figure 4.1 shows the materials and equipment set-up for Air Flowmeter.

FIGURE 4.1Air Flowmeter Test Set-up

Theory

2
 FIGURE 4.2 Types of Pitot Tubes (where T=total head,
S = static head and v = velocity head)

TABLE 4.1Flow Equations and their application (Flow quantities are given per second)
Coefficients
and
Eq. Common Allowable
Theoretical Equation (pp. 236 – 247) correction Fluid Devices
No. Name Pressures
factors,
p.239
Orifice,
nozzle No limits
Hydraulic Liquids, venture, for liquids.
(61) 𝑄 C, M, Y
equation gases, vapor Pitot tube, Gases:
impact Δp<0.1p1
tube
Nozzle,
Heat-drop Steam, (p2/p1) >
(62) C, M orifice and
equation 𝑊 = 223.8𝐴2𝜌2√∆𝐻 other vapor Venturi critical*

𝑊 = 223.8𝐴2𝜌2√𝑐𝑝(∆𝑇)
Nozzle,
Heat-drop Air, other (p2/p1) >
(63) C, M orifice and
equation gases critical*
Venturi

Perfect-gas Nozzle,
Gases and (p2/p1) >
(64) equation, C orifice and
vapor critical*
complete form Venturi

Perfect-gas Nozzle,
equation, no Gases and orifice and (p2/p1) >
(65) C, M Venturi
velocity vapor critical*
𝑊
approach
Fliegener’s 𝑝 𝐴 (p2/p1) <
(66) equation
𝑊 = 0.53 C, M Air Nozzle 0.53
𝑇

3
 Saturated (p2/p1) <
𝑊ϯ Steam 0.58
Goudie’s
(67) C, M Nozzle
equation
𝑊ϯ Superheated (p2/p1) <
Steam 0.545
Grashof’s Saturated (p2/p1) <
(68) 𝑊ϯ = 0.0165𝐴2𝑝10.97 C, M Nozzle
equation steam 0.58
(69) Napier’s rule 𝑊ϯ = Steam Nozzle (p2/p1) <
0.58
Fliegener’s Rounded Δp/p1<
equation entrance 0.10
(70) M Air nozzle

Steam Rounded
Δp/p1<
(71) Napier’s rule 𝑊ϯ M initially dry entrance
0.10
saturated nozzle
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nd ed. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

Units and Symbols:

A measured area of pipe or section, sq. ft.
H specific heat content (total heat or enthalpy per lb.)
p static pressure at pressure connection, psfa
h static head in ft. of fluid being measured
Q W/ρ = volume of fluid flowing, cfs
T absolute temperature of fluid at pressure connection °F
V velocity of fluid at pressure connection, fps
W weight of fluid flowing, lb./s
ρ weight density of fluid, lb./ft3
Subscript 1 -conduit and the fluid at the upstream connection
Subscript 2 -smallest measurable area and to fluid conditions in an actual pressure connection

Table 4.1 furnishes a reference list of final equations in convenient form for practical use and the
derivation of these forms consists in three steps:
1. Writing the general energy equation based on Bernoulli’s Theorem for the assumed
conditions.
2. Solving this equation downstream at throat velocity
3. Expressing the volume flow rate as a product of mean velocity and cross-sectional area given
by Q = AV
The energy at any given action may exist in the form of internal energy (U), potential energy due to
gravity or elevation head (z), potential energy due to pressure or pressure head (𝑝⁄𝜌 or 𝑝𝑣),
andvelocity head (𝑉2⁄2𝑔). The energy balance equation with the presence of heat and work at two
defined points can be expressed as

4
 (4.1)

The above equation also indicates that mechanical energy may be converted into heat either by
viscous friction or by turbulence. Since the same amount of fluid is involved in the upstream and
downstream sections of the system then, the symbol W referring to the weight of fluid can be
eliminated. It may also assume in all cases that there is no heat transfer (Q = 0), no external work
either due to fluid expansion or compression (i.e., work = 0). Considering that the fluid flows
horizontally starting from its original position (i.e., z1 = z2) then, the elevation head also can be
neglected. The general equation most widely used for volumetric flow meter calculation is

𝑄 (4.2)

Assuming an incompressible fluid with zero velocity of approach and no jet contraction then, the
corresponding factors Y, M, and C can be applied. It is therefore often called the YMCA equation,
because of its form.

Q = YMCA√2𝑔ℎ (4.3)

Values for The FactorsY, M, C, A

Y represents the correction for compressibility or “expansion factor” which may be used to determine
the volume flow rate using Equation 4.3. Approximate values of expansion factor are shown in Table
4.2.

TABLE 4.2 Approximate Values of Expansion Factor (This correction is intended for gas
compressibility which can be used when applying the hydraulic Equation 4.1 to the flow
of air or gases through a Venturi, flow nozzle or orifice.)
Pressure Ratio Ratio of throat diameter to pipe diameter, 𝐷2⁄𝐷1

𝑝2⁄𝑝1 (𝑝1 −𝑝2)⁄𝑝1 0.25 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.80

For Venturi Meters and Flow Nozzles

0.98 0.02 0.989 0.988 0.987 0.984 0.981 0.987

0.96 0.04 0.978 0.976 0.974 0.959 0.964 0.958
0.94 0.06 0.967 0.965 0.961 0.955 0.948 0.938
0.92 0.08 0.956 0.953 0.948 0.940 0.932 0.919
0.90 0.10 0.945 0.941 0.935 0.925 0.915 0.900
0.88 0.12 0.933 0.928 0.921 0.909 0.898 0.881
0.86 0.14 0.922 0.916 0.907 0.895 0.881 0.863
0.84 0.16 0.909 0.903 0.894 0.880 0.865 0.845
0.82 0.18 0.897 0.890 0.882 0.865 0.849 0.828
0.80 0.20 0.885 0.878 0.867 0.851 0.834 0.810
For Square-Edged Orifices

0.98 0.02 0.994 0.994 0.994 0.993 0.993 0.992

5
 0.96 0.04 0.986 0.986 0.986 0.985 0.985 0.984
0.94 0.06 0.980 0.980 0.979 0.979 0.977 0.976
0.92 0.08 0.974 0.974 0.973 0.972 0.970 0.969
0.90 0.10 0.970 0.969 0.968 0.964 0.962 0.961
0.88 0.12 0.964 0.963 0.962 0.959 0.956 0.953
0.86 0.14 0.958 0.956 0.954 0.952 0.948 0.946
0.84 0.16 0.952 0.950 0.948 0.944 0.940 0.937
0.82 0.18 0.947 0.944 0.942 0.937 0.933 0.929
0.80 0.20 0.941 0.938 0.935 0.930 0.925 0.920
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nded. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

M denotes the correction for velocity of approach or the “meter constant” which should be calculated
using Equation 4.4. Table 3 may be used for checking purposes only.

𝑀 (4.4)
where,

R = diameter ratio, or ratio of upstream pipe diameter to throat diameter

r = ratio of pipe area to throat area

TABLE 4.3Values of M or Orifice Correction Factor for Velocity of Approach

1 1 1
𝑀 𝑀 𝑀
𝑅 𝑅 𝑅
0.200 1.0008 0.450 1.0212 0.700 1.1472
0.250 1.0020 0.500 1.0328 0.750 1.2095
0.300 1.0041 0.550 1.0492 0.800 1.3015
0.350 1.0076 0.600 1.0719 0.850 1.4464
0.400 1.0131 0.650 1.1033 0.900 1.7052
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nd ed. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

C denotes the coefficient of discharge which should be obtained from the tables and chart given in
Table 4.1 for nozzles; Figure 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 for orifices; and Figure 4.6 for Venturi tubes. The C values
are roughly 0.6 for the square-edged orifice, 0.98 for the nozzle or the Venturi, and 1.0 for the Pitot
tube. A represents the area of the throat or minimum section in square feet for a pipe duct across
which the traverse is made.

TABLE 4.4 Discharge Coefficient For Long Radius Nozzles (2 to 10 in. NPS with pipe wall taps 1D
upstream and D downstream from pipe inlet.)
Reynolds Diameter Ratio
number at throat
0.20 - 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
50,000 0.966 0.966 0.965 0.962 0.958
100,000 0.978 0.977 0.976 0.974 0.970

6
 200,000 0.985 0.985 0.984 0.982 0.978
500,000 0.991 0.990 0.989 0.988 0.985
1,000,000 0.993 0.992 0.991 0.990 0.986
5,000,000 0.994 0.994 0.993 0.992 0.988
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nd ed. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

At lower Reynolds numbers such as 30,000, 20,000 and 5,000 the approximate coefficients are0.96,
0.956 and 0.91, respectively.Coefficients for free-open discharge to atmosphere are about 0.5 per
cent lower.

SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nd ed. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

FIGURE 4.3 Orifice Chart Data(Diameter ratio = 0.2 to 0.8)

Approximate orifice coefficients and concentric pipe characteristics with vena contrata.

7
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nd ed.
New Hamsphire: Lavine, I. Dover.

FIGURE 4.4 Orifice Chart Data (Diameter ratio = 10 to 80)

SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering

Laboratory Equipment. 2nded. New Hamsphire:
Lavine, I. Dover.

FIGURE 4.5 Orifice Chart Data based on Reynolds Number

8
SOURCE: Zimmerman, OT 1955. Chemical Engineering Laboratory Equipment. 2 nded. New Hamsphire: Lavine, I.
Dover.

FIGURE 4.6Venturi Tube Chart Data based on Reynolds Number

9
Procedure

1. Check connections to all manometers and adjust zero level before the blower is started.
2. Start the blower and adjust the control valve to the desired setting as designated by the
instructor.
3. Record the dry and wet bulb temperature, Rpm of the blower and the barometer.
4. Before reading the pitot gauge, the pitot tube should be placed in the center of the pipe.
5. Arrange a spacing device for pitot-tube traverse according to the dimensions below. Record the
total, static and velocity pressure (pitot-tube traverse, 20 reading’s each)
6. Record the manometer reading across the orifice and that of the venture meter.
7. Repeat procedures 2 to 6 for at least eight different settings of the control valve.
8. Obtain the dimensions of the various metering devices and calculate the air flow rate for each
device. Show sample computations for each.

10
Experimental Data
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Tmanometer [oC] 31.00 31.50 31.50
Twet bulb [oC] 28.00 28.50 28.50
Tdry bulb [oC] 31.00 31.50 31.50

Venturi Meter Orifice Meter

Dupstream [m] 0.14 Doriface [m] 0.1080
Dthroat [m] 0.09 Ddischarge [m] 0.1400
Nrotational speed [rpm] 3450 Patm [cm of Hg] 75.43
ϴmanometer [deg] 11 SGmanometer fluid 0.7820
Gravity [m/s2] 9.8067 γmanometer [kN/m3] 7.6688
ρwater [kg/m3] 1000 γwater [kN/m3] 9.8067

Valve Torqu PITOT TUBE (kPa) VENTURI (kPa) ORIFICE (kPa)

No. of Clearanc
Openi e
Trial e (mm) TOTA Stati Inle Throa Inle Outle
ng (Nm) Velocity ΔH ΔH
L c t t t t

1 0 0.0 0.13 2.69 2.64 0.35760019 2.74 2.74 0 2.74 2.74 0

2 3 4.6 0.14 2.22 2.17 0.35760019 2.25 2.15 0.01304 2.24 2.22 0.00261

3 6 9.0 0.16 1.92 1.83 0.479771 1.9 1.6 0.03912 1.85 1.62 0.02999

4 9 13.8 0.20 1.67 1.51 0.63969466 1.56 1.09 0.06129 1.51 1.10 0.05346

5 12 18.1 0.21 1.49 1.30 0.6970911 1.33 0.65 0.08867 1.22 0.65 0.07433

6 15 23.6 0.23 1.33 1.12 0.73286231 1.15 0.33 0.10693 1.02 0.34 0.08867

N/A 18

For Venturi Meter

Valve Opening Volumetric Flow Rate (m3/s) Velocity (m/s)
0 0 0
3 0.003533 0.229514
6 0.006119 0.39753
9 0.00766 0.497574
12 0.009213 0.598499
15 0.010117 0.657228

For Orifice Meter

Valve Opening Volumetric Flow Rate (m3/s) Velocity (m/s)
0 0 0

11
 3 0.002578 0.167476
6 0.008743 0.567938
9 0.011673 0.758279
12 0.013763 0.894076
15 0.015033 0.976544

Sample Computations (Using Trial 3 as Reference)

Velocity for Pitot Tube

2(𝑃 − 𝑃 )
𝑣= 𝛾
𝑔

2(2.69 𝑘𝑃𝑎 − 2.64 𝑘𝑃𝑎) 𝑚

𝑣= = 0.35760019
𝑘𝑁 𝑠
7.6688
𝑚
𝑚
9.8067
𝑠

Pressure Head for Venturi Meter and Orifice Meter

𝑃 −𝑃
∆𝐻 =
𝛾

1.9 𝑘𝑃𝑎 − 1.6 𝑘𝑃𝑎

∆𝐻 = = 0.03912 𝑚
𝑘𝑁
7.6688
𝑚
1.85 𝑘𝑃𝑎 − 1.62 𝑘𝑃𝑎
∆𝐻 = = 0.02999 𝑚
𝑘𝑁
7.6688
𝑚

Volumetric Flow Rate for Venturi Meter and Orifice Meter

𝑃 −𝑃
𝜋 𝑔
𝛾
𝑄=
1 1
8 −
𝑑 𝑑

⃓
⃓
⃓ 𝑚 1.6 𝑘𝑃𝑎 − 1.9 𝑘𝑃𝑎
⃓𝜋 (9.8067 )
⃓ 𝑠 𝑘𝑁
⃓
⃓ 7.6688 𝑚
𝑄=⃓ 𝑚 = 0.006119
⃓
⃓ 1 1 𝑠
8 −
⎷ (0.14 𝑚) (0.09 𝑚)

12
 ⃓
⃓
⃓ 𝑚 1.62 𝑘𝑃𝑎 − 1.85 𝑘𝑃𝑎
⃓𝜋 (9.8067 )
⃓ 𝑠 𝑘𝑁
⃓
⃓ 7.6688 𝑚
𝑄=⃓ 𝑚 = 0.008743
⃓
⃓ 1 1 𝑠
8 −
⎷ (0.14 𝑚) (0.108 𝑚)

Velocity at Inlet for Venturi Meter and Orifice Meter

𝑄
𝑣=
𝐴

𝑚
0.006119494
𝑣= 𝑠 = 0.39753 𝑚
𝜋(0.14 𝑚) 𝑠
4
𝑚
0.008742729
𝑣= 𝑠 = 0.567938 𝑚
𝜋(0.14 𝑚) 𝑠
4
Results and Discussions

Velocity Comparison of Different Devices

1.2

0.8
VELOCITY

0.6 Venturi Meter

Orifice Meter
0.4
Pitot Tube

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
TRIAL NUMBER

The graph above illustrates a visual representation of the velocities derived from each air
metering device. When comparing the velocities at each trial, there are quite noticeable differences
in the velocities. At no point throughout the trials did the devices coincide with one another. The only
time any of the velocities calculated for one device was the same as another was during the first trial
wherein the venturi meter and the orifice meter both had calculated velocities of zero. Despite this,
a similar trend can still be observed among the difference metering devices. All of them show an
increase in velocity as the trials progress. At each successive trial, the opening of the discharge valve

13
was further increased. This is effectively the independent variable in the experiment while the
velocity, volumetric flow rate, and pressure head are among the dependent variables in the
experiment.

Observations and Recommendations

Present briefly your individual observations and recommendations

Observations

From the results of the experiment, a few things can be observed. As stated earlier, a similar
trend can be seen in all the devices when it comes to velocity and the size of the opening of the
discharge valve. It can be noted that for each time the discharge valve is opened further, a noticeable
drop in pressure, measured using the manometer, can be seen throughout the experiment. This does
make sense as a discharge valve is meant to release backed up pressure in a system. It allows
pressure to escape through the valve which causes the drop in pressure measured by the devices.

Theoretically, a drop in pressure would cause an increase in velocity due to the conservation
of mechanical energy. This means that when pressure drops, velocity must compensate to maintain
the mechanical energy of the system. This can be observed in the results of the experiment wherein
both the volumetric flow rate and the velocity increase as the pressure drops because of the discharge
valve being opened further.

Throughout the experiment, the velocities measured using the three devices did not coincide
all together even once. The closest point at which all velocities calculated were the same was at the
first trial when the velocity for the venturi meter and the orifice meter were both zero. The pitot tube
did have a velocity due to there being a pressure difference between the static pressure head and the
total pressure head. This should not have been the case as the discharge valve was not open meaning
that the pressure should have been the same throughout the system. Had this not been the case, all
velocities at trial 1 would have been zero. The succeeding differences in velocity among the devices
can be attributed to the fact that they are all built in different ways which poses several issues when
it comes to losses and or discrepancies that can be caused due to the nature of the device’s
construction. They all serve the same purpose, but how they serve this purpose is where they differ.
Naturally, this causes differences and discrepancies between the devices.

Recommendations

For future iterations of this experiment, further investigation must be put into the exact
reasons as to why there were discrepancies between the devices and to determine if there are ways
to mitigate these discrepancies. Attention must also be placed into why there was a difference in the
static pressure head and total pressure head for the first trial in the pitot tube. This is to determine
whether or not the data found in this specific experiment was simply incorrect or if there are any
other underlying reasons as to why this occurred.

14
Conclusion

In conclusion, most if not all theories regarding air flow and metering have been followed.
Opening the discharge valve resulted in a reduction of pressure and an increase in velocity and
volumetric flow rate. This trend was seen in all the devices, barring one outlying instance for the pitot
tube. The discrepancies in the velocities between the three devices are to be expected due to their
different natures. Regardless of this, understanding the exact reasons why these discrepancies occur
may be useful in future studies.

Questions and Answers (NOTE: Use separate sheet for the answers.)

1. What is the difference between an orifice and a nozzle?

Both orifices and nozzles are both related to fluid flow as they are usually exit points for fluid in
a system. An orifice is used primarily when the fluid flow rate must be measured. A nozzle on the
other hand is used to change fluid flow characteristics as fluid exits the nozzle meaning that it can
increase or decrease the velocity of the fluid (Orifices and Nozzles, n.d.).
2. Calculate the friction loss and dynamic pressure in 22 feet of ductwork that is 7 feet by 9 feet and
carries 75,000 cfm of 82°F air.
Friction loss formula can be defined as:
0.109136(𝑞) .
∆ℎ (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑔𝑎𝑢𝑔𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 100𝑓𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡) =
(𝑑 ) .
Where:
1.30(𝑎 × 𝑏) .
𝑑 (𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) =
(𝑎 + 𝑏) .
1.30(84 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 × 108 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) .
𝑑 (𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = = 103.9160059 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠
(84 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 + 108 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) .
Therefore:
0.109136(75,000 𝑐𝑓𝑚) .
∆ℎ = = 0.015026 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑔𝑎𝑢𝑔𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 100𝑓𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡
(103.9160059 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) .
𝑖𝑛𝐻 𝑂
∆ℎ = 0.015026 × 22 𝑓𝑡 = 0.00330572 𝑖𝑛𝐻 𝑂
100 𝑓𝑡
Dynamic pressure formula can be defined as:
𝑣 𝑑
ℎ =
1096.7
Where:
𝑄
𝑣=
𝐴
75,000 𝑐𝑓𝑚 𝑓𝑡
𝑣= = 1190.47619
7 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡 × 9 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡 𝑚𝑖𝑛
and
d = density of air at 82℉

15
 𝑘𝑔
𝑑 = 1.173
𝑚
or
𝑘𝑔 1 𝑙𝑏 0.0283168 𝑚 𝑙𝑏
𝑑 = 1.173 × × = 0.073227937
𝑚 0.453592 𝑘𝑔 1 𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑡
Therefore:
𝑓𝑡 𝑙𝑏
(1190.47619 ) (0.073227937 )
𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑡
ℎ = = 0.086286 𝑖𝑛𝐻 𝑂
1096.7

3. What is the best method of calibrating anemometer, Pitot tube, and airflow meter?
The best way to calibrate an anemometer would be through a wind tunnel. Pitot tubes can
also be used to calibrate an anemometer and are usually used in tandem with wind tunnels to make
sure an anemometer is correctly calibrated (Anemometer Calibration Standards, n.d.). Pitot tubes can
also be calibrated by calibration wind tunnels, and this is normally the most efficient way of
calibrating a pitot tube (Dikgale, n.d.). Air flow meters are usually manually calibrated using a
predetermined standard the meter must follow. The meter is adjusted to the standard at different
conditions to assure that the device is fully calibrated (How to Calibrate a Flow Meter & Calibration
Procedures, 2019).

4. A fan develops 4.6 in. of static pressure and 0.85 in. of dynamic pressure when the flow is 11,200
cfm of 85°F, the shaft power is 9.7Hp and the speed is 1,950 rpm. Calculate the static and
mechanical efficiencies.
Static Efficiency can be defined by the formula:
𝑞 × 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒
𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = × 100%
6343 × 𝐻𝑝
Therefore:
11,200 𝑐𝑓𝑚 × 4.6 𝑖𝑛𝐻 𝑂
𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = × 100% = 83.73546%
6343 × 9.7 𝐻𝑝
Mechanical Efficiency can be defined by the formula:
𝑞 × 𝐷𝑦𝑛𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒
Mechanical 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = × 100%
6343 × 𝐻𝑝
Therefore:
11,200 𝑐𝑓𝑚 × 4.6 + 0.85 𝑖𝑛𝐻 𝑂
Mechanical 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = × 100% = 99.208316%
6343 × 9.7 𝐻𝑝

16
References

Anemometer Calibration Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved from Pass:

https://www.calibrate.co.uk/calibration/air-velocity/about-anemometers/anemometers-
calibration/
Dikgale, S. (n.d.). Calibration Of L-type Pitot Tubes. Retrieved from National Laboratory Association:
http://nla.org.za/webfiles/conferences/2016/Presentations/Monday,%2026%20Septemb
er%202016/M307%20Calibration%20of%20L-
type%20pitot%20tubes%20at%20low%20speeds.pdf
How to Calibrate a Flow Meter & Calibration Procedures. (2019, March 18). Retrieved from Integrated
Flow Solutions : https://ifsolutions.com/how-do-you-calibrate-a-flow-meter/
Orifices and Nozzles. (n.d.). Retrieved from Applied Flow Technology: https://www.aft.com/learning-
center/application-topics/674-orifices-and-nozzles

17