Lab 5: Fluid Flow Measurement

A Lab Report

Submitted By

Neel Nadpara

ME 3264 Applied Measurements Laboratory

Section 004L

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Connecticut

Lab Preformed On:

March 2, 2015
Summary:
In this fluid flow measurement lab our goal was to gain working experience with the use of
different fluid flow measurement devices and to understand the advantages and disadvantages of
each. In the lab we used four different types of measurement devices located on a hydraulic
bench to determine the amount of fluid flow going through the system. These tests included a
volumetric technique, a rotameter technique, Venturi meter technique, and a turbine meter
technique. The basics of determining fluid flow rate using the volumetric technique included
measuring the amount of time in seconds the hydraulic bench’s basin took to rise between
chosen graduations calibrated to one liter. In the rotameter technique, fluid that ran through a
vertical tapered tube with the fluid flow moving upward through the tube past a float
corresponded to a fluid flow rate measured in liters per minute. In the Venturi meter technique
the fluid flow running through a pipe was subjected to a contraction section and then to a throat
having a smaller cross-sectional area than the pipe, this resulted in a pressure variation along the
meter which could then be corresponded to a calculation of fluid flow measurement. Lastly in the
turbine meter technique fluid flow was corresponded with a measured frequency that could then
be used to calculate the fluid flow rate using the calibration constant rating, k, given by the
factory for the meter. The purpose of using the four techniques was to determine the best method
of measuring fluid flow rate in this particular set up. The varying techniques helped ensure that
we were exposed to different measurement techniques that could be used in the field for different
types of systems. Based on the measured flow rates and uncertainties along we concluded the
best measurement devices would be either the rotameter or the turbine meter because of their
relatively low uncertainty levels, with a preference on the turbine meter because of its ability to
quickly measure fluid flow rate and high degree repeatability with great accuracy. The next
measurement method we would prefer is the volumetric method because of its easy
measurements of time and liter measurement and low chance of uncertainty due to those two
measurements. The last method of measurement we would choose is the Venturi meter because
of its multiple degrees of uncertainties from several measured values needed to measure pressure
and conversely volumetric flow rate.

Experimental Procedure:
In order to start the lab we first had to turn on the machine and open the downstream and
upstream valves. The downstream valve was not opened all the way to prevent leaking from the
valve and reducing fluid pressure in the system. The purpose of the upstream valve was to
control the input of fluid flow into the system. A change in the turn of the valve leads to an
increase or decrease of fluid into the system. Once the pump was started it was important to wait
for the water to run through the system so that any residual air bubbles could be flushed out the
system as to not affect the measured values of fluid flow rate. In the lab, once the fluid pump was
turned on in the hydraulic bench measurements were calculated in a variety of ways. For the
initial setting of fluid flow within the system, we used the rotameter to get as close to the value
of fluid flow that we desired (4, 8, 10, 12, or 16 liters/min). The rotameter was given as
calibrated to +/- 3% of the full scale reading. Once that was set we plugged the basin of the
bench and measured fluid flow by measuring the time in seconds, through a stopwatch, it took to
 ∆Liter
fill the basin from 0 to 35 liters. The fluid flow rate was then calculated as: q = ∆Time (minutes).
With the basin drained, the next measurement we obtained was from the turbine meter. The
water flow through the turbine meter corresponded to a measured frequency found by connecting
the meter to a LabView VI. The turbine meter required a 6-18 volt power supply to record the
fluid flow going through it. The LabView VI measured the frequency of rotation of the meter.
Using this measured value and the given factory provided calibration constant of k = 1200 pulses
per liter or otherwise known as the k factor we determined the volumetric flow rate using the
frequency
equation: q = . For the last reading we determined volumetric flow rate using the
k factor
Venturi meter. The Venturi meter on the bench was attached to a series of pipes at various
locations along the meter itself. In order to find flow rate the height of the water in the pipes at 2
different locations, one before the bend in the Venturi meter and one after. Location A and E
were chosen because they represented the greatest difference in height. Using the heights of the
water, known density values for water, gravity, and the area of the tube, this allowed us to
calculate the pressure at these locations using the equation: p = ρgh. Using these values
2 (p1 −p2 )
volumetric flow was calculated using the equation: q ideal = A2 √ d4
. The experiment was
ρ (1− 4 )
D

then repeated for the remaining 4 other initial volumetric flow rates of the rotameter.

Figure 1: Hydraulic Bench

Results and Discussion:

Calculating fluid flow rate between the four fluid flow systems resulted in values that were
relatively similar between the set rate and the calculated rates. One observation we made about
the computer measured flow rate of the turbine meter was it’s relatively little variability of its
calculated rate and the set rate using the rotameter.

Data Broken Down by System:

Rotameter
Flow Rate (Liters/min) %Error
4 +/- 3%
8 +/- 3%
10 +/- 3%
12 +/- 3%
16 +/- 3%

In the lab we used the rotameter as our initial measurement device to determine the flow rate in
the system. The percent error of the rotameter was given to us as +/- 3%.

Turbine Meter
K Factor (pulses per Flow Rate
Frequency (Hz) %Error
liter) (Liters/min)

81.8306 +/- 3% 1200 4.0915

170.966 +/- 3% 1200 8.5483
204.912 +/- 3% 1200 10.2456
244.068 +/- 3% 1200 12.2034
333.333 +/- 3% 1200 16.6667
The frequency had a slight fluctuation through the course of the measurement. The percent error
for this measurement was given as +/- 3%. The k factor was given to us as 1200 pulses per liter.
 Venturi Meter
Height Volumetric
Height Diameter Diameter Area of Pressure Pressure
of Flow Rate
of Tube of Tube A of Tube E Tube E in Tube in Tube
Tube E (Liters/min
A (m) (m) (m) (m2) A (Pa) E (Pa)
(m) or Q Ideal)
0.217 0.208 0.026 0.01679 0.000221 2128.8 2040.48 6.142
0.222 0.188 0.026 0.01679 0.000221 2177.8 1844.28 11.937
0.226 0.179 0.026 0.01679 0.000221 2217.1 1755.99 14.035
0.231 0.165 0.026 0.01679 0.000221 2266.1 1618.65 16.632
0.248 0.124 0.026 0.01679 0.000221 2432.9 1216.44 22.797

The heights of the water within the tubes also had slight fluctuations through the course of
measurement. We determined that there was a fluctuation of .01 m for the measured heights.
Moreover, based on the amount of measurements we had to take from the apparatus, the Venturi
meter also was determined to have the highest amount of uncertainty in the measurements, which
will be discussed later.

Volumetric Technique
Range (liters) Minutes Flow Rate (Liters/min)

0-35 8.29 4.222

0-35 4.09 8.557
0-35 3.24 10.802
0-35 2.52 13.889
0-35 2.04 17.157

The volumetric technique calculated very good measurements of flow rate as compared to the set
flow rate.

Comparison of Flow Rates for each Measurement Device at each

Flow
Rotameter Turbine Venturi Volumetric
4 4.0915 6.142 4.222
8 8.5483 11.937 8.557
10 10.2456 14.035 10.802
12 12.2034 16.632 13.889
16 16.6667 22.797 17.157
 Comparison of Volumetric Flow Rate
25
Rotameter Flow Rate

R² = 1
20 Turbine Meter Flow Rate
R² = 0.9983
Measured Flow Rate (L/min)

Venturi Meter Flow Rate

15 R² = 0.9969
Volumetric Method Flow Rate
R² = 0.9921
Linear (Rotameter Flow Rate)
10
Linear (Turbine Meter Flow
Rate)
5 Linear (Venturi Meter Flow
Rate )
Linear (Volumetric Method
Flow Rate)
0
0 5 10 15 20
Set Volumetric Flow Rate (L/min)

By graphing the values of flow rate and comparing the calculated volumetric rate of each
measurement device to the set volumetric flow rate determined by the rotameter we were able to
do a regression analysis of the varying tests to the set values. From the graph we determined that
the regression of the rotameter was 1, for the turbine meter it was 0.9983, for the Venturi meter it
was 0.9969, and for the volumetric method it was 0.9921. From this graph we saw that the
turbine meter represented the best regression to the set values.
Data and Error Analysis:
The primary focus in this lab was to determine a detailed error analysis on our methods of
measuring volumetric fluid flow rate to find out what method could be best used to determine
volumetric flow rate in the system. The rotameter percent error was given to us as a +/- 3%
error. This meant that at 4 liters/min the plus or minus was 0.12 liters/min, at 8 liters/min the plus
or minus was 0.24 liters/min, and at 8 liters/min the plus or minus was 0.36 liters/min and meant
that at higher flow rates the uncertainty would increase linearly. The average uncertainty in this
measurement was 0.24 liters/min. For the turbine meter the uncertainties resulted in uncertainties
for the 4 liters/min of 0.1217, the 8/min of 0.25, and the 12 liters/min of 0.3664. The average
uncertainty in the turbine meter was 0.246 and based on the data increased with higher and
higher flow rates. For the volumetric technique, the uncertainty in readings from the
measurement of the amount of liters in the basin was estimated to be 0.5 liters. For the 4
liters/min reading the uncertainty was 0.132398 liters/min, for the 8 liters/min reading the
uncertainty was at 0.272109 then the overall average uncertainty became 0.274034 liters/min and
it was observed that uncertainty increased as flow rate increased. For the Venturi meter
technique the uncertainty for the 4 liters/min test was 0.235026, the 8 liters/min test was
0.284679 which in turn came out to an overall average uncertainty of 0.326191 liters/min.
Some sources of error in the lab came from measurements of height in the Venturi meter. In fact
if you think about it by measurements taken, the Venturi meter has the most number of
measurements taken with a great deal of uncertainty and the volumetric method as well. The
heights tended to jump around slightly as the water flow was going through the system leaving
our reported value to be within an average range that the fluid height was at. Another source of
error could have come from variable diameters of the tube in the Venturi meter that measured the
pressure in different location since that value was given to us as a constant. Another source of
error occurred in the turbine meter calculations, because it’s readings also tended to jump around
a lot during the readings and the value that we measured was just in the average range of the true
value of frequency for that flow rate. Improvement in this lab could come from having done
additional trials to see if our results remained consistent across multiple different tests. Another
improvement we could have made was to see if the temperature of the water had anything to do
with how our measurements and its possible affects throughout the course of the lab.

Conclusion:

Based on our values of uncertainties we found the rotameter and the turbine meter to have the
best values of uncertainty. Though both represented very low uncertainty levels, the high
precision and accuracy of the turbine meter determined that its measurement of flow rate would
be ideal in this measurement of flow rate as opposed to the rotameter because of the relative time
it took to settle to a value of flow rate with the tube. The Venturi meter represented the
measurement with the highest uncertainty. There were multiple measurements that had to be
taken in order to determine flow rate, and as such had an effect on the overall uncertainty of the
measurement. For the volumetric technique, the application in which it was used seemed to be
the cause of most of the uncertainty. The basin’s ability to measure change in volume over time
could have been better measured with respect to time if the basin had a smaller width and a
greater height to see a greater change in height over periods of time. One last thing to include in
the choice of measurement device is the physical limitations that each measurement device has.
The turbine meter in the lab had a maximum fluid flow rate of 30 liters/min, which may be a
deterrent to using that device if there was a chance that the flow rate was higher than that. The
rotameter had a 40 liters/min limitation, which could also be a deterrent. The volumetric
technique is limited by the basin. Whatever measurement device is used, it is important to cater
to the particular situation that fluid flow will be measured in.