Liquid Flow Meter Provers

Commitment to Excellence
Industry Standards
 American Petroleum Institute
 Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
– Chapter 4 – Proving Systems
– Chapter 12 – Calculation of Petroleum Quantities

 ISO
 OIML
What is a meter proving

 A meter proving is the physical test used to

determine the accuracy and performance of a
liquid meter
 By placing a liquid meter in series with a
meter prover, which has a known or base
volume in such a way that all the liquid
measured by the meter is also measured by
the prover
 Basic Proving Principle
 Regardless of the prover type, the same basic
proving principle applies

Known Volume
_______________
= Meter Factor
Unknown Volume
 Four Basic Requirements
(1) Prove under normal conditions
The meter must be proved under the same conditions as it
is normally expected to operate.
(2) Adequate prover capacity
The meter prover must have a capacity large enough to
provide proving runs at adequate duration.
(3) Sufficient number of runs
A sufficient number of runs must be made to establish a
valid proving.
(4) Traceable results to National Institute of Standards and Technology
Calibration of the meter prover must be traceable to
(NIST) calibrated test measures.
History of Proving
Prover Requirements
 Pre 1978
– 0.5% of maximum hourly flow rate
• eg. 2,500 BPH prover requires 12.5 bbl volume

 Post 1978
– 10,000 pulses from meter

 1988
– Pulse interpolation with small volume provers
Prover Types
 Bi-directional
 Uni-directional
 Small Volume
Meter Proving by Displacement

Pulses from Meter Prover

Computer STOP

START Detectors

Flow from
Meter

Calibrated Volume
Displacer

Calibrated lenth
Small Volume Provers
 API Definition:

 A Small Volume Prover (SVP); is a prover that will

collect less than 10,000 meter pulses in a prover
pass.

 Reason: 10,000 pulse per pass is to generate the

mathematical precision necessary to calculate a
four decimal place meter factor accurately
What Made Small volume provers
possible?
 Precision optical volume detection switches
 The double chronometry pulse interpolation
technique
 The advent of modern computers and precision
timing techniques
 Modern computers ability to average multiple
pass prover runs to statistically attain meter
pulses per run
Mechanical vs. Optical Detectors

1 mm
Pulse Interpolation
 Definition
– Process of determining some value between two
known values through the use of a procedure or
algorithm.
 Uncertainty requirement
– +/- 0.01% or 1 part in 10,000
• must be able to distinguish time to at least 0.00001 of a
second

 Methodology
– Double Chronometry
Conventional Pulse Counting
Discrimination

Start count Stop Count

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Actual 7.255 Pulses

Requirement for Pulse Interpolation

Start count Stop Count

1 2 3 4

A
1 2 3 349
0.150 0.105

The first count has an actual Any partial pulse after the last
value of 0.150 pulse but is pulse is not accounted for. in this
counted as 1 case 0.105

Actual pulse count should be :

0.150 + 349 + 0.105 = 349.255

Conventional counting would record 350 pulses.

Pulse Interpolation calculates 349.255 pulses
Conventional counting error 0.21%
Dual Chronometry ( Double Timing )

Start count Stop Count

T1

1 2 3 n n+1

T2

T1
Interpolated number of pulses, n = n +1 ----
T2
 Double Chronometry Example
 K-Factor Calculation

 A(Time) C ( Pulses ) 
K    
 D(Volume) B(TimeforPulses ) 

 A= Time for known displaced volume in seconds 0.58377

 B = Time for whole meter pulses 0.58329
 C = Accumulated whole meter pulses 0000364
 D = Known displaced volume (barrels) 0.35174

 0.58377 364 
K    K = 1020.0468 pulses/bbl
 0.35714 0.58329 
Compact Prover
Engineered Technology
Prover Selection
 Portable or Fixed
 Product
 Meters to be proved
 Flow range
 Continuous or intermittent flow
Portable or Stationary
Stationary Compact Provers
Portable Compact Provers
Vertical Compact Provers
Vertical Lift Compact Provers
Fixed Mount Vertical Compact Prover
Vertical Lift Compact Prover
Waterdraw of Compact Prover
Waterdraw Diverter Valve System
Seal Leak Detection
Hydraulic Assembly

Old Design New Design

Optical Assembly

Old Design

New Design
 Interface Board
 Retrofit interface card
– Jumper selectable power
• 12 vdc or 24 vdc
– Same footprint

 Eliminates need for

secondary 12vdc power
supply
Advantages of Small Volume Provers
 Do not require 10,000 meter pulses per prover pass
 Greater fluid compatibility
 Lower pressure drop
 Faster meter proving
 Less product loss during proving operation, flush from one
product to another
 Requires less space ( less real estate )
 Lower transportation cost for portable provers
 Replaceable volume switches
 High accuracy waterdraw calibration
 Brooks vs. Calibron
 Technology
– Brooks patented design
– Calibron designed prover
around existing patents of
Brooks
– No external moving parts
reduces maintenance
– Nitrogen launch system
provides significant
advantages to maintain the
lowest pressure drop
– Hydraulic retraction systems
– Tie rods permit flow tube to
be turned for preventive
maintenance
– Complete control of
manufacturing process
 Financial Strength
– Backed by the strength of
Emerson Electric
– Longevity in Industry; 20 years
of manufacturing Compact
Provers
 After Sale Service and Support
– Best in class
 Greatest Installed Base
– Pioneered Industry
– Over 700 provers installed
– >40 mass provers
– 40-50 provers annually
 Calibron -Flanged flow tube-
-Chain, sprockets,
bearing, etc exposed to
higher replacement cost
environment; not good
harder to work with in field;
-Dual piston shaft- -No tie rods- in salt latent or heavy
not able to turn flow tube for
more seals more difficult to perform humidity area
PM/reduced wear
maintenance
-Non
supported
overhung load;
increased seal
wear
-Carbon steel flow
tube-
nickel plated; not sst w/
hard chrome

-No positive
force on to
keep poppet
seated and
overcome seal
friction

-No inlet piping

for
instrumentatio -Longer length- -Mechanical chain drive-
n and/or high installation cost higher maintenance more wear items; moving
density high shipping cost parts become safety issue
Calibron’s Chain Drive Push
 1980 Harley Davidson
Introduced Belt Drive
System
– A kevlar belt replaces
the chain as the final
drive. The belt is
cleaner running, and
needs less adjustments
and maintenance. It
isn't long before belt
final drive is standard
on all Harley-Davidson®
motorcycles.
Calibron….Its not so damn simple!
Statesboro Compact Prover Group

Compact Prover Organization

Engineering Sales/Marketing Manufacturing Service

David Molloy Brad Lurie John Russell Phil Gray Steve Wright
Group Mgr. Marketing Mgr. Applications Mgr. Production Mgr. Service Mgr.
1.912.489.0369 1.713.827.3353 1.912.489.0347 1.912.489.0344 1.912.489.0314

Systems Engineer CADD Electrical Engineer Assembly Manufacturing Test

Jackie Skinner Cindy Youmans Patrick Cambell
BiDirectional Provers
Prover Arrangement
 Available space
 Above or below ground
 U-fold, straight or double-fold
 Skid Package
Single U-bend

Double Folded
Mechanical Design
 Pressure
 Temperature
 Piping Code
 Process Conditions
 Materials of Construction
Prover Pipe Size
 V = Q/A
 Maximum displacer velocity
 5 to 6 ft/sec (1.5 to 1.8 m/sec)
 Minimum displacer velocity
 0.5 ft/sec (0.15 m/sec)
Prover Volume
 System repeatability
 +/- 0.02 % (+/- 0.01%)
 +/- one part in 10,000
Prover Volume
 Detector switch repeatability
 Prover counter discrimination
 Meter output discrimination threshold
 Double Chronometry or Pulse Interpolation
Prover Design & Construction
 Pre-run pipe length
 Selection of pipe and fittings
 Flange alignment
 Launch chamber size / length
Prover Design & Construction
 Internal coating
 Sphere or seal materials
 Instrumentation
– Pressure
– Temperature
– Valve seal check

 Insulation
Meter Prover
Valves
 Flow Control
 Isolation
 Recalibration
 Pressure relief
Prover Operation
 Preliminary checks
– Equipment
– Valves & seals
– Sphere
– Vents and drains
 Crude Oil Pipeline Measurement
Flow Testing (3) 6” 150# Turbine Meters
16” Bi-directional Prover
200,000 BPOD
Prover Operation
 Trial proving runs
– Flow stability
– Temperature stability
Correction Factors
 CTSP – temperature effect on prover steel
 CPSP – pressure effect on prover steel
 CTLP – temperature effect on liquid in prover
 CPLP – pressure effect on liquid in prover
 CUSTOMER REFINERY
METER PROVING REPORT

LOCATION: AAAAAAAAAA DATE/TIME: MM/DD/YY HH:MM

LIQUID DEN AT 15 DEGC PROVER I.D. PROVER W.T.
AAAAAAAAAAAAA XX.X XX.XXX MM X.XXX MM
METER SIZE TAG NO. SERIAL NO.
XX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUN L-R R-L TOTAL PRESS (PSIG) TEMP (DEGF) TRIAL
PULSES PULSES PULSES T(SECS) PROVER METER PROVER METER K-FCTOR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX
2 XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX
3 XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX
4 XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX
5 XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVG OF LAST 5 RUNS XXXXX XXX.X XXX XXX XXX.X XXX.X XXXX.XX

[(TMF MAX - TMF MIN) / TMF AVG] * 100 = XX.XX%

METER FACTOR CALCULATION

A. PROVER VOLUME AT 15 DEGC & 0 BARG M3 XXX.XXXXX
B. TEMP. COR. FACTOR FOR STEEL OF PROVER (CTSP) X.XXXX
C. PRESS. COR. FACTOR FOR STEEL OF PROVER (CPSP) X.XXXX
D. TEMP. COR. FACTOR FOR LIQUID IN PROVER (CTLP) X.XXXX
E. PRESS. COR. FACTOR FOR LIQUID IN PROVER (CPLP) X.XXXX
F. CORRECTED PROVER VOLUME (A*B*C*D*E) M3 XXX.XXXXX
G. AVERAGE PULSE COUNT XXXXX.X
H. TEMP COR. FACTOR FOR STEEL IN METER (CTSM) X.XXXX
I. TEMP. COR. FACTOR FOR LIQUID IN METER (CTLM) X.XXXX
J. PRESS. COR. FACTOR FOR LIQUID IN METER (CPLM) X.XXXX
K. CORRECTED METER PULSES (G*H*I*J) XXXXX.X
L. K-FACTOR AT PROVING COND. (K/F) XXXX.XX
M. AVG. METER FLOW RATE (A*B*C*3600/AVG TIME) M3HR XXXXXX

METER FACTOR HISTORICAL DATA

DATE: MM/DD/YY MM/DD/YY MM/DD/YY MM/DD/YY MM/DD/YY

K-FACTOR: XXXX.XX XXXX.XX XXXX.XX XXXX.XX XXXX.XX
FLOW RATE: XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX
DEVIATION:(+/-) .XX % .XX % .XX % .XX % .XX %

NEW K-FACTOR'S % DEVIATION FROM PEVIOUS FACTOR X.XX

PROVED BY : _____________________________ DATE:_____________

VERIFIED BY: _____________________________ DATE:_____________

Prover Calibration
 Waterdraw method
 Master meter method
48” 600# Meter Prover for Crude Oil Service
Daniel…Total Proving Solutions