Take a sneak peek at the new NIST.gov and let us know what you think!
(Please note: some content may not be complete on the beta site.).
NIST Authors in Bold
|Author(s):||Jodie G. Pope; John D. Wright; Sherry D. Sheckels;|
|Title:||Tests of the Extended Lee Model Using Three Different Turbine Meters|
|Published:||June 20, 2012|
|Abstract:||We report additional tests of our ,extended Lee modelŠ for calibrating turbine meters. The model accounts for 1) Reynolds number (Re) dependent drag and lift, 2) bearing static drag and 3) bearing viscous drag. Initially, we tested this model using a dual−rotor, 2.5−cm−diameter turbine meter and flow measurements spanning a 200:1 range (50 Re 109,000) with liquid mixtures spanning a 42:1 kinematic viscosity range (1.2 × 106 m2 / s ν 50 × 106 m2 / s). The model correlated the volumetric flow data within 3.6 % over the entire Re range. The same data had a maximum deviation of 17 % from the commonly used Strouhal versus Roshko (or Re) correlation. In this work, we tested the model using three different single−rotor turbine meters with diameters of 2.5 cm, 1.6 cm, and 1.9 cm and flow measurements spanning a 75:1 range (140 < Re < 102,000) with liquid mixtures spanning a 12:1 kinematic viscosity range (1.2 × 106 m2 / s ν 14 × 106 m2 / s). The model correlates the flow data within 2.3 % for all three meters over the entire Re range. The same data had a maximum deviation of 4.76 % from the commonly used Strouhal versus Roshko (or Re) correlation. Therefore, the model works well for single−rotor and dual−rotor meters. The model shows that static bearing drag is responsible for fanning (or non−convergence) of multiple−ν calibration curves. However, as with the dual−rotor meter, the model begins to fail at low Re numbers where the bearing drags dominate the rotor‰s behavior causing corrections as large as 26 % of the calibration factor.|
|Conference:||8th International Symposium on Fluid Flow Measurement|
|Location:||Colorado Springs, CO|
|Dates:||June 20-22, 2012|
|Keywords:||Turbine Meter, Kinematic Viscosity, Propylene Glycol|
|PDF version:||Click here to retrieve PDF version of paper (1MB)|