Upstream velocity profile effects on orifice

flowmeters
G. I_. MORRISON*, K. R. HALLt, M. L. MACEK*, L. M. IHFE*,
R. E. DeOTTE, Jr* and J. E. HAUGLIE*
*Texas A & M University, Mechanical Engineering Department, College Station,
Texas 77843-3122, USA; -I-Texas A & M University, Chemical Engineering
Department, College Station, Texas 77843-3122, USA

The effects of upstream velocity profile on the performance of orifice flowmeters

were studied. Non-swirling maldistributed axial velocity profiles were obtained
using a concentric pipe flow conditioner. Orifice flowmeters w i t h / 3 ratios of
0.43, 0.50, 0.60, 0.70 and 0.75 were installed downstream of the flow
conditioner and operated at a Reynolds number of 54 700 in a 50.4 cm pipe.
Increasing the flow along the centreline of the pipe decreased the pressure drop
across the orifice plate, resulting in increased discharge coefficients. The
opposite was observed as the flow along the pipe centreline was decreased. The
errors increased with increasing/3 ratio. A swirl generator was installed upstream
of the/3 = 0.43 and 0.50 orifice plates. The swirl produced effects opposite to
the axial velocity. The change in discharge coefficient increased with decreasing
/3 ratio.
Keywords: orifice flowmeters; velocity profiles; swirl

Nomenclature associated with orifice flowmeters have resulted in a

re-evaluation of these standards. Studies by Brennan et
Cd Coefficient of discharge al., 2 Mattingly and Yeh, 3 Gajan et al., 4 Morrow et al., 5
D Pipe inside diameter Karnik et al., 6 Shen7 and Morrison et al. 8-1° have
d Orifice diameter shown how placement of the upstream flow conditioner,
m Mass flow rate maldistributed velocity profiles and swirl can change
mvrr Second-order radial moment of axial the value of the discharge coefficient. For non-swirling
momentum flows, Gajan et al. 4 observed that as the inlet velocity
P Pressure profile varied, the pressure drop across the orifice plate
Pi Pressure at the upstream flange tap changed but the downstream pressure distribution along
Po Pressure at the downstream flange tap the pipe wall did not. Morrison eta/. 1° numerically
r Radial distance from pipe centreline simulated various upstream velocity profiles and deter-
R Pipe radius mined that increasing the momentum near the pipe
U Axial velocity wall increased the overall pressure drop and hence
X Distance downstream from orifice plate caused a decrease in the discharge coefficient. The
Y Distance across pipe opposite was true if the momentum increased along
Beta ratio, orifice diameter/pipe diameter the pipe centreline. Increases in /3 ratio increased the
&P Flange tap pressure drop across orifice percent variation in discharge coefficient. Morrison et
plate al. 9 experimentally verified the phenomena using data
Density from Morrow et al. 5 and their own.
Shen7 studied the effects of swirling flow on the
Introduction measurement accuracy of a standard orifice meter. He
concluded that swirling flows can cause significant
The effects of upstream velocity profile upon the under-measurement in orifice meters with errors as
performance of orifice flowmeters has always been high as 5% depending upon the swirl intensity; the
important, as illustrated by detailed descriptions of flow field generated by a vane-type swirl generator can
upstream piping and flow conditioner locations in effectively simulate swirling flows resulting from two
industry standards such as the ANSI/2530 standard. 1 close out-of-plane elbows with a blade angle setting of
However, recent desires to decrease the uncertainty 10 to 15°; a tube bundle conditioner is very effective

0955-,5986/94/02/0087-06 Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2 87

(~ 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd
G. L. Morrison et al. - Upstream velocity profile effects

in removing swirl from a flow; however, the tube configuration with no tube bundle, swirl caused the
bundle causes the orifice meter to over-measure the profile to flatten within 17D. Distortion of the axial
flow rate. velocity profile was less severe for the 7 tube bundle
For standard orifice plates, Morrison, e t a / . 8 than for the 19 tube bundle. Consequently, Cd changes
reported that errors in the measured flow rate increased were more sensitive to conditioner location for the 19
with increasing/3 ratio when swirl was present. For a tube conditioner.
/3 = 0.75 orifice plate, changes in Cd approached 25%, Karnik et al. 6 reported on the effects of turbulence
while for a /3 = 0.50 plate they reached only 5%. on orifice meter performance. Using a 10.16 cm piping
Also, it appeared that, for both plates investigated, configuration including a 19 tube bundle at atmospheric
increased swirl resulted in larger changes in Cd. Changes conditions with air as the fluid, two cases were
in Cd are undesirable because they cause inaccuracies considered: the tube bundle placed in good flow
in flow measurement, and an ideal plate would be one conditions, and the tube bundle used as a sliding vane
for which Cd remained constant over all flow conditions. downstream of a single 90 ° elbow. In both cases, for
Mattingly and Yeh 11 conducted research involving various positions of the tube bundle with respect to an
the measurement of non-ideal pipe flows resulting from orifice plate, Cd for the orifice plate was compared to
the placement of an orifice plate within 20-30 pipe a baseline value. The experiments showed that orifice
diameters downstream of a long radius elbow. A long plate metering is influenced by both the mean and the
radius elbow is an elbow with a radius of centreline turbulent velocity fields.
curvature 1.5 times the inner pipe diameter. They
investigated three standard orifice plates with
/3 : 0.363, 0.500 and 0.750. For the case with
Objective
/3 = 0.500, Cd decreased relative to the value for ideal It is evident that the accuracy of a standard orifice
orifice plate installation. This caused the orifice plate plate can be affected by a multitude of factors, such
to under-read the actual flow rate because flow rate is as swirl, axial velocity profile, the presence of an
proportional to Cd. Errors as high as 2% occurred. elbow, turbulence, and flow conditioner orientation
Conventionally, acceptable uncertainties have been and placement. This study evaluated the effects of axial
approximately 0.5%. Similar results were obtained for velocity profile and swirl.
the other two orifice plates. The errors in the flow rate
measurement for the plate with/3 = 0.363 were evident
but small; however, for/3 = 0.75, errors reached 6%.
Facilities
Brennan et al. 2 conducted an investigation similar Figure 1 is a schematic of the apparatus used for the
to that of Mattingly and Yeh. 11 Tests of different orifice orifice plate tests. After ambient air was compressed
flowmeters were conducted in a 10.16 cm (4") tube for and dried, it passed to a large, spherical pressure vessel
Reynolds numbers ranging from 400000 to 1 600000. that acted as a reservoir. Air from the reservoir flowed
The orifice plates tested had/3 = 0.43, 0.55, 0.67 and through an automated control valve that maintained a
0.73. Different levels of swirl were generated and the constant pressure supply (620 kPa) to the test rig. A
changes in Cd were determined. Differences of up to heater maintained the air at a constant temperature
5% were noted for certain combinations of swirl and (43 °C). The constant state air passed through one
/3. They concluded that flow measurement with orifice or more converging nozzles depending upon the
flowmeters in the presence of swirl in the pipeline combination of ball valves that were open, a ball valve
could cause significant errors. succeeded each converging nozzle. The converging
Morrow and Park 5 researched the effects of tube
bundle location on orifice meter error and velocity
profiles. Their experiments consisted of flowing nitrogen
at a pressure of 0.72 MPa (105 psia) and Reynolds
numbers ranging from 400000 to 900000 through a Back-Pressure
' Valves
10.16 cm diameter orifice meter tube, 17 diameters in
length, downstream of a 90 ° elbow. A 19 tube bundle Relief Valves Straighteners

and a 7 tube bundle in-line straightening vanes were Slotted

modified such that the distance between the vane and Orifice
Plates
the orifice, x/D, could be changed. Cd results for Sonic
/3 = 0.40, 0.60 and 0.75 were presented for three Nozzlel
Nozzlel

meter tube configurations. These configurations were Exhaust

no vane, a 19 tube bundle with x/D values between 5

and 14.5, and a 7 tube bundle with x/D values between Flow
Straighteners
5 and 14. They determined that a 7 tube bundle acted
Heater
quite differently from a 19 tube bundle or no tube
bundle at all. For values of x/D less than 10, the Cd ~oUnt~m~t~d
measurements for the 7 tube bundle were sensitive to
the orientation of the conditioner relative to pressure
tap location; however Cd was insensitive to orientation CompressorI Intake
for the 19 tube bundle. When the tube bundle was
near the elbow, swirl was removed from the flow, but
the axial velocity profile distortion induced by the
Dryers
elbow propagated through the conditioner. For the Figure 1 Flow meter facility

88 Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2

 G. L. Morrison et al. - Upstream velocity profile effects

nozzles accelerated the air flow to the speed of sound.

/ ~ OUTER PIPE
Because the air flow was sonic and the state of the air
was fixed upstream of the nozzles, the mass flow rate
was constant. Four nozzles yielded 15 possible flow
rates, ranging from 0.014 to 0.209 kg s-1. These mass
flow rates produce Reynolds numbers ranging from
18400 to 273000 for flow in a 5.08 cm schedule 40
pipe.
Once the air passed through the nozzles, it flowed
to the orifice run section of the test rig. The upstream
section of the orifice run consisted of either a swirl Figure 3 Concentric pipe device
generator, a concentric tube device for generating
maldistributed axial velocity profiles, or a straight pipe Daniel Model 1100F flow straightener and a 2.54 cm
for baseline testing. The swirl generator (Figure 2) tube centred within a 5.08 cm pipe, all upstream of
introduced repeatable swirl conditions in the flow and the orifice plate. The flow rate through the annulus
enabled study of the effects of swirl on the pipe wall was controlled by three Dwyer rotameters that allowed
pressure distributions and Cd. When the swirl generator air to flow into the outer pipe through six equally
was used, the upstream section consisted of a Daniel spaced ports around the pipe circumference. Adjusting
Model 1100F flow straightener, 16 diameters of straight the rotameters provided different velocity profiles. When
pipe, a vane type swirl generator, and 30 diameters of no flow existed through the rotameters, air flowed only
straight pipe. The orifice plate was followed by 18 through the inner tube, yielding a bullet-shaped fluid
diameters of straight pipe and another flow straightener. velocity profile with fluid velocities high near the pipe
The swirl generator was held in-line with the flow by centreline and falling off rapidly towards the pipe wall.
pipe flanges. The six vanes within the swirl generator Conversely, when air flowed through the annulus, the
were rotated separately to form a desired angle with fluid velocity was low near the pipe centreline and
the flow. Each vane in the swirl generator had an angle high near the pipe wall. Following the flow straightener
indicator. When no swirl was desired, the vanes were and the concentric tubes were the orifice plate and 18
set parallel to the airflow. Two orifice runs provided diameters of straight pipe downstream of the orifice
greater testing capability (two different tests could be plate. The final fittings were another Daniel Model
performed at the same time). A gate valve at the end 1100F flow straightener and a gate valve to control
of each orifice run controlled the back pressure upstream back pressure.
of the orifice plate. For baseline testing, the swirl For both test arrangements (swirl and concentric
generator was removed from the piping system, yielding tubes) pressure taps existed along the pipe wall upstream
46 pipe diameters of straight pipe between the flow and downstream of the orifice plate. The pressure taps
straightener and the orifice plate. were 1/16" OD stainless steel tubulations inserted part
The concentric tube device (Figure 3) generated way through the pipe wall into a 1/16" diameter hole.
non-swirling axial velocity profiles that deviated from A 1/32" diameter hole was drilled through the pipe
fully developed turbulent fluid flow. The effects of wall for each pressure tap. The smaller 1/32" holes had
these different velocity profiles on pipe wall pressure little effect on the flow. There were 48 and 45 pressure
distributions and Cd were studied. The upstream section taps for the swirl arrangement and the concentric tube
of the concentric tube arrangement consisted of a arrangement, respectively.
The pressure taps were connected to a Scanivalve
48J4-1 rotary pressure scanner. The output of the
pressure scanner was measured by a Validyne DP103
differential type pressure transducer. The transducer
output proceeded to a Validyne Model CD15 Carrier
Demodulator. The demodulator output interfaced with
a computer using the 16 bit A/D converter of a Keithley
Model 575 Measurement and Control System. The
position of the pressure scanner was monitored and
controlled by the computer, the Keithley Model 575,
a Scanivalve OED2/BINY Decoder, a Scanivalve CTLR2/
$2-$6 Controller, and a Scanivalve JOETM-48 Encoder.
The encoder sent position information to the decoder,
which in turn sent digital output to the digital inputs
of the Keithley Model 575. The computer read the
digital inputs of the Model 575 and then recorded the
scanner position for a particular pressure reading. The
computer also sent information to the Model 575
concerning the scanner position. Digital outputs from
the Model 575 sent signals to the controller, causing
the pressure scanner to step to the next position or to
'home' to the first position.
Figure 2 Swirl generator consisting of six rotatable The velocity profiles of the pipe flows were
vanes measured using a United Sensor CA-120 Pitot probe and

Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2 89

G. L. Morrison et al. - Upstream velocity profile effects

a manual traversing mechanism. The aforementioned 0.70 and 0.75, were placed in the orifice run and
pressure transducer and demodulator were used to operated at the five different conditions generated by
measure the difference between the Pitot probe stag- the concentric pipe flow conditioner and for the well-
nation pressure and the pipe wall pressure at the axial conditioned (baseline) case. The orifice plates were
location of the Pitot probe. For each Pitot probe position 3.175 mm (1/8") thick with a 45 ° bevel on the
the computer read a series of voltages, averaged the downstream 1.587 mm (1/16") thickness of the plate.
readings, and then converted the average voltage into The plates were standard plates purchased from Daniel
fluid velocity. The traverser guided the Pitot probe Industries. Discharge coefficients were calculated for
along the inner pipe diameter. the various operating conditions according to the ANSI/
25301 standard using the following equations:
Results 4r~ (1 -/34) 1/2
Ca = (2)
Concentric pipe flow conditioner Y1 ~'d2(2pAP) 1/2
The exit of the concentric pipe flow conditioner was
located eight pipe diameters upstream of the orifice Y1 = 1 - (0.41 +0.35/34 ) k (3)
plate and the mass flow rate was set to obtain a pipe
Reynolds number of 54 700. The velocity profile was Pi - Po
measured at the flange tap location with the orifice Xl -- Pi (4)
plate removed as was done by Morrow et al. s Five
were the upstream (P~) and downstream (Po) pressures
different concentric pipe flow conditioner operating
were measured, the density p was calculated, the mass
conditions were considered and the resulting velocity
flow rate rri was given by the sonic nozzles, and the
profiles appear in Figure 4.
geometric values were measured.
Morrison et al. 9,1° have shown that the second
The percentage change in the discharge coefficient
order radial moment of axial momentum given by:
from the wel I-conditioned (baseline) case was calculated
and plotted as a function of mvrr in Figure 5. For low
mvrr =
fL pu2r2dA =
aO 3O
pu2r3drdO

can be used to quantify effectively the radial distribution

(1) values of mvrr (excess centreline velocity) the discharge
coefficient was too large, indicating that a smaller
pressure drop was measured. This was caused by
of the axial velocity, such that a good correlation the momentum being concentrated towards the pipe
between mvrr and Cd results. The velocity profiles centreline, resulting in decreased streamline curvature
obtained vary from excess velocity on the pipe centreline as the flow entered the orifice. This decreased curvature
(with a velocity deficit near the pipe wall) to a velocity resulted in a smaller pressure drop. As mvrr increased
deficit on the pipe centreline (with an excess velocity (decreasing the centreline velocity) the discharge coef-
near the pipe wall). The velocity profiles were curve ficient decreased and became lower than the baseline
fit and integrated to obtain mvrr. The values of mvrr case for the largest values of mvrr, indicating a larger
varied from 0.387 to 0.471. pressure drop. In this case, the momentum concentrated
Five different orifice plates, /3 = 0.43, 0.50, 0.60,

~ i Beta = 0.43
25-
Beta = 0.50
" N ~ ~ Beta = 0.60
3 ~ ------~-- Beta=0.70

.= 2-
©
e:aa
,.1=
1
;> 10 ~ +0.387 !
'~ E +0.396 I
0-
°4°9 I
0.450 "

0 ' I ' I '

.I
o2 ' "1"
-1 . . . . I ' i
0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 Second Order Moment of M o m e n t u m
Radial Position, Y/R Figure 5 Percentage change in discharge coefficient as
Figure4 Axial velocity profiles measured at the a function of the axial velocity profile as characterized
upstream flange tap location with no orifice plate by the second-order radial moment of axial momentum
present at a pipe Reynolds number of 54 700 for a pipe Reynolds number of 54 700

90 Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2

 G. L. Morrison et al. - Upstream velocity profile effects

towards the pipe wall, resulting in increased streamline

curvature as mass was forced to move radially inwards 16 Swirl Generator Setting
to enter the orifice. This increase in streamline curvature
required larger pressure gradients. At the lowest mvrr 0 deg.
value, the error in the discharge coefficient increased 15 deg.
from 0.5% to 3.5% as the /3 ratio increased from 12
0.43 to 0.75, respectively. As the centreline velocity 45 deg.
decreased (increasing mvrr) the errors reduced to less
than 1% for all /3 ratios. 2
Swirl generator 8
The swirl generator was operated at four different
settings, 0 °, 15 ° , 45 ° and 75 ° . These angles do not
represent the swirl angle in the flow, only the angle of
the vanes in the swirl generator. The axial velocity
profile was measured using the three-hole Pitot probe
one pipe radius upstream of the/3 = 0.43 orifice plate
(Figure 6). As the level of swirl increased, the axial
velocity profile became flatter, until at the highest
setting (75 °) there was actually a velocity deficit near -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
the pipe centreline. Since the axial velocity profile was
not independent of the swirl generator angle setting, Radial Position, Y/R
mvrr varied as well as the amount of swirl. Therefore, Figure 7 Tangential velocity profile 1.OR upstream of
it was necessary to separate the mvrr and swirl effects. a/3 -= 0.43 standard orifice plate operating at a Reynolds
Observing Figure 6, it is clear that the mass flow number of 54 700
rates obtained by integrating the four different profiles
would be different, especially for the highest swirl
with the axial velocity, the centre of the vortex,
setting. At this high swirl setting, it was difficult to
indicated by the tangential velocity equalling zero, was
obtain accurate results from the three-hole Pitot probe.
not on the pipe centreline but was near Y/R = - 0 . 2 .
To quantify the error, each velocity profile was integrated
This was a result of the vortex interacting with the pipe
to obtain the mass flow rate. The values obtained
wall and moving nearer the wall. The tangential
were 0.045, 0.043, 0.042 and 0.039 kg s-1 for swirl
velocities were larger to the left of the vortex centre
generator angles increasing from 0 ° to 75 °. Comparing
due to the reduced cross-sectional area available for
these with the sonic nozzle value of 0.042 kg s-1
the tangential velocity to pass.
results in a maximum difference of --+7%.
The overall percentage change in discharge coef-
The tangential velocity (illustrated in Figure 7)
ficient was calculated for the/3 = 0.43 and 0.50 orifice
increased with increasing swirl generator setting. As
plates and is represented by the combined effect data
presented in Figure 8. This combined effect was due
to both mvrr and swirl. The combined effect is that the
discharge coefficient increased as the amount of swirl
(and mvrr) increased, reaching a maximum of 8% for
/3 = 0.43 and 5% for/3 = 0.50. This trend was opposite
to that for the non-swirling axial velocity data, which
16 showed decreasing discharge coefficient dependence
upon mvrr with decreasing /3 ratio and discharge
coefficient decreasing with increasing mvrr. Morrison
.~ 12 et al. ~ have shown that for /3 = 0.75 the discharge
coefficient increased 25%. Therefore, some 13 ratio
must exist between 0.50 and 0.75 for which the effects
of swirl are a minimum. The data indicated the
discharge coefficient was more sensitive to swirl than
to axial velocity profile, with the swirl effects overriding
the mvrr effect. In an effort to decouple the effects, we
assumed the mvrr and swirl effects to be independent.
~ 45 deg. The axial velocity profiles in Figure 6 were curve fitted
11 and the values of mvrr calculated. At these values of
1 ~ 75 deg. mvrr, the concentric tube data were used to determine
0 ' I ' I ' I ' "P the percentage change in discharge coefficient caused
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 by the axial velocity profile effects.
These are shown in Figure 8. Subtracting the
Radial Position, Y/R percentage change in discharge coefficient caused by
Figure 6 Axial velocity profile I.OR upstream of axial velocity profile effects from the combined effect
/3 = 0.43 standard orifice plate operating at a Reynolds of swirl and mvrr resulted in an estimate of the
number of 54 700 percentage change in discharge coefficient due to the

Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2 91

 G. L. Morrison et al. - Upstream velocity profile effects

Beta=0.43, Combined Effect discharge coefficients. The percentage change in dis-

• Beta=0.43, mvrr Effect Only
charge coefficient increased with increasing /3 ratio,
varying from 0.5% to 3.5%. As the velocity along the
Beta = 0.43, Swirl Effect Only
pipe centreline decreased the discharge coefficients
Beta=0.50. Combined Effect
decreased to values approximately 1% below the well-
Beta=0.50, mvrr Effect Only conditioned flow case.
~'*--'-- Beta=0.50, Swirl Effect Only A swirl generator was installed upstream of the
8 /3 = 0.43 and 0.50 orifice plates. The swirl produced
i i effects opposite to those due to the axial velocity
distribution alone. The change in discharge coefficient
increased with decreasing/3 ratio. At the lowest swirl
i i / generator setting, the discharge coefficients were 1%
/ higher than the well-conditioned flow and increased to
4 5% and 7% for /3 = 0.50 and 0.43, respectively, at
- /f f" - _
the highest swirl generator setting.
.=.

Acknowledgements
d This research was supported by the Gas Research
Institute, Physical Sciences Department, under the
~. o
direction of Dr Max Klein and Dr Ferol Fish.

References
1 Natural Gas Fluids Measurement, Manual of Petroleum Measure-
-4 ment Standards ANSI/API 2530-1985, Chapter 14, Section 3,
' ' I American Petroleum Institute (1985)
0 20 40 60 80 2 Brennan, J. A., McFaddin, S. E., Sindt, C. F. and Kothari, K. M.
The influence of swirling flow on orifice and turbine flowmeter
Swirl Generator Setting performance Flow Meas. Instrum. 1 (1989) 5 4
3 Mattingly, G. E. and Yeh, T. T. Effects of pipe elbows and tube
bundles on selected types of flowmeters Flow Meas. Instrum. 2
Figure 8 Effects of swirl and axial velocity profile upon (1991) 4-13
/3 = 0.43 and 0.50 orifice plates operating at a Reynolds 4 Gajan, P., Hebrand, P., Millan, P., Giovanni, A., Alisber, A.,
number of 54 700 Strzelecki, A. and Trichet, P. Basic study on flow metering of
fluids in pipes containing an orifice plate, Gas Research Institute
Report, GRI-90/0073 (1991)
swirl. These values are presented in Figure 8 as the 5 Morrow, T. B. and Park, I. T. Effects of tube bundle location
swirl effect only data. These data indicate that swirl on orifice meter error and velocity profiles Pipeline Technol V-
alone can cause a 6.5% to 8% increase in the discharge A (1992) 13-18
coefficient at the highest swirl setting. At the lowest 6 Karnik, U., lungowski, W. M. and Botros, K. K. Effect of
turbulence on orifice meter performance Pipeline Technol V-A
swirl setting, errors of 1% were present. This indicates (1992) 19-29
that any swirl can cause significant errors at these /3 7 Shen, J. J. S. Characterization of swirling flow and its effects on
ratios. orifice metering SPE Paper 22865 66th Annual Conference and
Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas TX
(1991)
Conclusions 8 Morrison, G. L., DeOtte, R. E., Moen, M., Hall, K. R. and
Holste, I. C. Beta ratio, swirl and Reynolds number dependence
The effects of the upstream velocity profile upon the of wall pressure in orifice flowmeters Flow Meas Instrum. 1
performance of orifice flowmeters were studied. Non- (1990) 269-277
swirling maldistributed axial velocity profiles were 9 Morrison, G. L., DeOlte, R. E. Jr and Beam, E. I. Installation
effects upon orifice flowmeters Flow Meas Instrum 3 (1992)
obtained using a concentric pipe flow conditioner. 89-93
Orifice flowmeters with /3 ratios of 0.43, 0.50, 0.60, 10 Morrison, G. L., Panak, D. I.. and DeOtte, R. E. Jr. Numerical
0.70 and 0.75 were installed downstream of the flow study of the effects of upstream flow condition upon orifice flow
conditioner and operated at a Reynolds number of meter performance Pipeline Technol. V-A (1992) 47-52
11 Mattingly, G. E. and Yeh, T. T. NBS' industry-government
54700 in a 50.4 cm pipe. Increasing the flow along consortium research program on flowmeter installation effects:
the centreline of the pipe decreased the pressure drop summary report with emphasis on research period January-July
across the orifice plate and resulted in increased 1988 NISTIR 89-4080 Gaithersburg MD (1989)

92 Flow Meas. Instrum., 1994 Volume 5 Number 2