Comment on the relative advantages and disadvantages of

Venturimeter, orifice plate meter and rotameter as flow measuring devices.

The orifice plate meter is fairly accurate in its measurement

It is also the easiest to construct.
Orifice meter occupies less space thus it could be useful to measure fluid flows within space
constraints

The orifice plate meter has a significant head loss.

Its level of accuracy falls as the flow rate rises. The sudden contraction of the
diameter causes high loss factor due to turbulent flow.
A tube with diameter larger then the orifice meter plate is required to reduce this
energy loss.

Furthermore, as the diameter of the tube is reduced, the angle between the surface of t
he tube with the horizontal should not be too large, so as to reduce energy loss and improve
accuracy, but that would demand even more horizontal space.

Comment on the head losses associated with all the flow meters
studied in this experiment, emphasising the relationship between the
mechanism of loss generation and its magnitude

For the venturimeter, its long section enables gradual constriction and expansion
of diameter.
The head loss is thus caused by the dissipation of energy via the friction between
the fluid and the inner surface of the pipe.
It has been observed that the head loss in the venturimeter is relatively
small relative to the orifice plate.
In the Venturi meter, the gradual reduction and expansion of the diameter
reduces the separation of flow as well as reduces the separation in the
deceleration portion of the meter.
Hence, the energy loss is mainly due to friction with the wall of the tube rather to
inefficient mixing and separate flow

The orifice plate has a significant head loss when compared to the other parts of
the apparatus. VO is observed to be very high too.
As fluid velocity across the plate is relatively high, the sudden contraction
and expansion of the diameter before and after the orifice place may result in a
sharp and significant change in momentum about the orifice, causing
turbulence to form on both ends.
The turbulence increases as the flow increases.
Consequently, this turbulence dissipates energy, thus resulting in the head loss
Hence the energy loss may be due to the high energy flow across the small
orifice plate, resulting in a significant loss in energy.
With the orifice plate experiencing as much as 5 times more head loss
it can be implied that turbulence contributes to significantly higher energy loss than friction
with the internal walls.

Explain with the aid of simple sketches what is the

vena contractor of an
orifice meter.
Vena contracta is the point in a fluid stream where the
diameter of the stream is
the least. The contraction takes place at a section slightl
y downstream from the
orifice, where the fluid flow is horizontal. Streaml
ines will converge just
downstream of the diameter change, and a region of sep
arated flow occurs from
the sharp corner of the diameter change and extends past
the vena contracta.

Vena contracta is the narrowest central flow region

of a jet that occurs just downstream to the

orifice plate. It is characterized by high velocity

, laminar flow. Laminar flow, sometimes
known as streamline flow, occurs when a fluid flows
in parallel layers, with no disruption
between the layers.

The vena contracta refers to the point in the fluid stre

am where the diameter of
the streamlines is the smallest, and it occurs just slightly d
ownstream of the
orifice, where the flow is nearly horizontal and is
concentric with the orifice and
flow channel. After the vena contracta, the streamlines
diverge and a region of
separated flow occurs and extends past it.

A cross section of a circular orifice of diameter D

o

is shown. The thickness of the wall is

assumed small compared to the diameter of the orifice.
Due to the convergence of the
streamlines approaching the orifice, the cross section o
f the jet decreases slightly until the
pressure is equalized over the cross-section, and the ve
locity profile is nearly rectangular.
This point of minimum area is called the
vena contracta
. Beyond the vena contracta, friction
with the fluid outside the jet (air) slows it down, an
d the cross section increases perforce.
This divergence is usually quite small, and the jet is ne
arly cylindrical with a constant
14
velocity. The jet is held together by surface tension, o
f course, which has a stronger effect the
smaller the diameter of the jet

. Comment on the limitations and major sources of err

or in this experiment
Limitations of the experiment:
- The experiment enables only a small range of flow m
easured. The
apparatus does not allow measurement over larger range.
- This experiment is conducted using water. Apparatus w
ill not work for fluid
with higher viscosity as very large energy will be requi
red.
- The weighing tank is of limited size, not large enou
gh to measure
rotameter reading of value lesser than 60. The water i
n tank will overflow.
Major sources of errors:

The reading of manometer. The readings may not be acc

urate as it tends
to jump, even after allowing some time before the rea
ding is taken. Thus
reading taken might not be the actual result.

The manometer is not totally transparent, due to prese

nce of water vapour
and bubbles in the tube, thus readings may not be accurat
e.

Measuring of a few meters using the same apparatus may

result in more
error in the measurements and calculation.

Usage of stopwatch and weight to measure the mass flow

rate may not be
accurate due to human errors.

Parallax error reading from the apparatus may occur du

e to the colour of
the fluid used.
Conclusion
From the experiment, we are able to recognize the wor
king mechanism of the
venturimeter, orifice meter and rotameter used to measu
re flow.
We have also compared the advantages and disadvantages of
the three meters,
as well as calculated the head loss from each type of meter
. From these, we are
able to better understand the principles behind the w
orking mechanism of each
meter, the efficiency of each meter and thus determine
wisely which meter is
better suited for various applications.

In this experiement, the 3 devices - the venture me

ter, orifice meter and the rotameter has been close
ly
examined.
A
lso, the coefficient of discharge , C
d

, for the
V
enturi meter and orifice meter is determined; where
C
d

for
the
V
enturi meter is 0.9781, while C
d

for the orifice meter is 0.3937. In addition, the r

otameter is
successfully calibrated with calibration curve

Q
A

= (0.0199 + 0.3311 ) x 10
5,

Futhermore, the energy losses in the

V
enturi meter, orifice meter, rotameter as well as t
he wide angle
diffuser and a 90Felbow is determined.
A
ll in all, the objectives of this experiment are ac
hieved

Limitations of the experiment:

- The experiment enables only a small range of flow m
easured as the
pumps power is limited and some of the apparatus do no
t allow
measurement over a larger range of flow rates.
- This experiment cannot be conducted with fluids of gre
ater viscosity as a
lot of energy will be required to pump the fluid aro
und the experiment set
up. Also corrosive fluids or fluids at higher temperatur
es cannot be
experimented with as some of the connections and tubing
s are less
resistant to corrosion and/ or high temperatures.
- The weighing tank is of limited size, and is not suitab
le to be used to time
greater mass flow rates of fluids and inaccuracies will ari
se if it fills up too
fast. Also, the water in tank will overflow easily if the
flow is too high.
- Also, the experiment may not be suitable for dark colo
ured or opaque
fluids as the rotameter float has to be visible to take
that reading.
Major sources of errors:

The pressure of the AC pump is not constant and fluctuat

es quite a bit.
This will result in estimation errors while trying to r
ead the measurement

values off the instruments. The readings will fluctuate,

even after allowing
the set up some time to settle. This problem may be solved
by using a
stabiliser for the pump pressure or a DC pump.

Condensation and dirt build up occurs inside the manome

ter tubes,
making them not totally transparent. This may cause inaccura
cies in the
readings, even if efforts are taken to reduce parallax e
rrors. Conducting
the experiment in a dryer environment may reduce the r
isk of
condensation.

Using a hand stopwatch and manually loading weights to

measure the
mass flow rate may not be accurate due to human errors an
d bouncing of
the lever armature. It may be better to use an electron
ic timer attached to
the contact point between the arm and the frame and u
sing mechanically
loaded weights or a calibrated spring to counter the
weight of the water.
Implementing this will make the experiment more accura
te but will also
increase the overall cost.

Parallax error reading from the apparatus may occur as

the manometer
diameter is small. Also, at the thickness, surface tension
effects may
become significant, resulting in inaccurate readings.

The tubings and connections may not be totally airtight

or watertight and
any leakage of either fluid will result in inaccuracies i
n the reading taken.
Conclusion
From this experiment, we have become more familiar wit

h the working
mechanisms of the various types of flow measuring devices such
as the Venturi
meter, orifice meter and rotameter. We have also dete
rmined the coefficient of
discharge of the Venturi meter and calibrated the rota
meter.
We have also compared the advantages and disadvantages of
the three meters,
and calculated the head loss from each measuring apparat
us. From these, we
are able to better understand the principles behind t
he workings of each meter,
and determine which meter is better suited for various a
pplications. Thus, I feel
that this experiment has been a satisfactory one.

)
Human reaction time and parallax is one possible error.
b)
Water is used in this experiment. Any other substances th
at have higher viscosity may not
be used. There still exist some air bubbles inside the tub
e that could have led to
inaccurate readings and affect subsequent calculations.
c)
The flow rate in the experiment is control by the pum
p which may not pump water at a
constant rate
.
d)

Friction at the joints of the lever system may cause

inaccuracies when weighing the
water.
e)
The readings on the manometer are always fluctuating and
consistent results cannot be
obtained.

CONCLUSION

The usage of the venture meter, orifice meter and the r

otameter has been examined. From the

three, the venture meter gives us the most accurate re

ading and the rotameter involves the
most heat loss. We can also see that the main reaso
n for any energy loss is due to turbulent
flow, friction and drag loss. In order to obtain an acc
urate reading, the pressure and velocity
difference had to be significant across the meters.
Coefficient of discharge for venturimeter and orifice
Meter,
C
d

= 1.0178
C = 0.5904
From the graph of Q
A

against Rotameter reading, we obtain the calibration curv

e equation,
Q
A

= (0.0189L + 0.4395)(10
5